Inaccuracies

[SayaOtonashi]

Angela Walker I'll go to my favorite. It is actually a chronological analysis of several stories.
1. Story of the Slaughter of Innocents - Supposedly, Herod the Great heard about the newborn Jesus and sent his army out to kill all the children in the land, assuming Jesus would be among them, but the family got a divine warning and left the area. A miracle that Jesus survived, although every other child was slaughtered. Some miracle, right. Anyway, it gives us a date to work with. Herod died in 4 BCE, so the birth of Jesus was before that. 2. Census story - When Mary was near due, Joseph and Mary had to travel to Jerusalem al Judea for the census. This was big, because prophecy said that the Messiah would be born in Judea, and this move for the census seemed to answer the prophecy. The NT mentions the name of the Governor who ordered the census - Quirinius - and this gives us another date. Quirinius was made Governor in 6AD, so the census, and the birth, must be after that. Analysis: How can a child born after 6 AD be pursued by a jealous king who died more than 10 years earlier? Chronologically speaking, both cannot be true, so one of them must be false. 3. Jesus ministry - NT says that Jesus was at least 30 when he began his ministry, and ministered @ 2 years before his death, making him at least 32 when he died. 4. Crucifixion - NT claims that the crucifixion was ordered by Governor Pontius Pilate. Pontius left office in 36 AD. Analysis of 2,3,&4: If Jesus was born after 6 AD (census) and died before 36 AD (Pontius left office), then he could not have been AT LEAST 32 when he died, and that is assuming that Quirinius ordered and completed the census on his first day as governor (impossible) and Pontius held the execution on his last day in office (highly unlikely). Add to that, biblical scholars, using New Testament references, determined that the crucifixion was April of 30 AD, making Jesus age at time of death to be less than 24 (more likely 22 or 23), not greater than 32, as the NT claims. One or all of those stories must be false, because it is chronologically impossible for them to all be true. The main reason that Christians don't spot these obvious flaws is that they don't examine these stories as a chronological whole. Trying to create a timeline of biblical stories is impossible, because so many of them are clearly conflicting, timewise, and therefore chronologically impossible when taken together. There is more than one account in the NT of Jesus last words as he died on the cross, and they aren't even remotely close. Only one account of the last words could be true, because last words are a one time deal. The rest must be false. I could go on, but you get the point, right?


What do you guys think about this ?

 

[Tolworth John]

Or the dates are inaccurate.
seehttps://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/birth/popular-conservative-journalist-attacks-genesis-and-jesus-birth/

he short answer is that the basis for our modern calendar began in AD 525 when Dionysius Exiguus the Little was commissioned to develop a standard calendar for the Western Church. He decided to start the calendar in AD 1, but his calculations were off by approximately four years.2 Given that Herod ordered the slaughter of all the children two years old and younger in Bethlehem, it is possible that Jesus was about two years old at that time, thus the year of His birth may have been 6 or 5 BC. Bolt is correct on this point, yet nearly every other statement he made in the above paragraph is disputed.

 

[SayaOtonashi]

True.

 

[hedrick]

Right. It's hard to believe that the versions in Matthew and Luke are both entirely true. If you believe in inerrancy, of course you can harmonize anything. But one has Jesus grow up in Egypt, the other Nazareth.

Fortunately, starting with Jesus' ministry we get a reasonably consistent story. Probably because people who saw it were still around.

 

[eleos1954]

Angela Walker I'll go to my favorite. It is actually a chronological analysis of several stories.
1. Story of the Slaughter of Innocents - Supposedly, Herod the Great heard about the newborn Jesus and sent his army out to kill all the children in the land, assuming Jesus would be among them, but the family got a divine warning and left the area. A miracle that Jesus survived, although every other child was slaughtered. Some miracle, right. Anyway, it gives us a date to work with. Herod died in 4 BCE, so the birth of Jesus was before that. 2. Census story - When Mary was near due, Joseph and Mary had to travel to Jerusalem al Judea for the census. This was big, because prophecy said that the Messiah would be born in Judea, and this move for the census seemed to answer the prophecy. The NT mentions the name of the Governor who ordered the census - Quirinius - and this gives us another date. Quirinius was made Governor in 6AD, so the census, and the birth, must be after that. Analysis: How can a child born after 6 AD be pursued by a jealous king who died more than 10 years earlier? Chronologically speaking, both cannot be true, so one of them must be false. 3. Jesus ministry - NT says that Jesus was at least 30 when he began his ministry, and ministered @ 2 years before his death, making him at least 32 when he died. 4. Crucifixion - NT claims that the crucifixion was ordered by Governor Pontius Pilate. Pontius left office in 36 AD. Analysis of 2,3,&4: If Jesus was born after 6 AD (census) and died before 36 AD (Pontius left office), then he could not have been AT LEAST 32 when he died, and that is assuming that Quirinius ordered and completed the census on his first day as governor (impossible) and Pontius held the execution on his last day in office (highly unlikely). Add to that, biblical scholars, using New Testament references, determined that the crucifixion was April of 30 AD, making Jesus age at time of death to be less than 24 (more likely 22 or 23), not greater than 32, as the NT claims. One or all of those stories must be false, because it is chronologically impossible for them to all be true. The main reason that Christians don't spot these obvious flaws is that they don't examine these stories as a chronological whole. Trying to create a timeline of biblical stories is impossible, because so many of them are clearly conflicting, timewise, and therefore chronologically impossible when taken together. There is more than one account in the NT of Jesus last words as he died on the cross, and they aren't even remotely close. Only one account of the last words could be true, because last words are a one time deal. The rest must be false. I could go on, but you get the point, right?


What do you guys think about this ?

Another approach to estimating the year of birth works backwards from when Jesus began preaching, based on the statement in Luke 3:23 that he was "about 30 years of age" at that time.[29] Jesus began to preach after being baptised by John the Baptist, and based on Luke’s gospel John only began baptising people in "the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar" (Luke 3:1–2), which scholars estimate would be in about AD 28–29. By working backwards from this, it would appear that Jesus was probably born no later than 1 BC. However, if the phrase "about 30" is interpreted to mean 32 years old, this could fit a date of birth just within the reign of Herod, who died in 4 BC

This date is independently confirmed by John's reference in John 2:20 to the Temple being in its 46th year of construction during Passover when Jesus began his ministry, which corresponds to around 27–29 AD according to scholarly estimates.

 

[ralliann]

Right. It's hard to believe that the versions in Matthew and Luke are both entirely true. If you believe in inerrancy, of course you can harmonize anything. But one has Jesus grow up in Egypt, the other Nazareth.

Fortunately, starting with Jesus' ministry we get a reasonably consistent story. Probably because people who saw it were still around.

Are you speaking of this?
Mt 2:13 And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.
Mt 2:14 When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:
Mt 2:15 And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.
Mt 2:19 But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,

When did Herod die? how old was Jesus?

 

[jamiec]

Angela Walker I'll go to my favorite. It is actually a chronological analysis of several stories.
1. Story of the Slaughter of Innocents - Supposedly, Herod the Great heard about the newborn Jesus and sent his army out to kill all the children in the land, assuming Jesus would be among them, but the family got a divine warning and left the area. A miracle that Jesus survived, although every other child was slaughtered. Some miracle, right. Anyway, it gives us a date to work with. Herod died in 4 BCE, so the birth of Jesus was before that. 2. Census story - When Mary was near due, Joseph and Mary had to travel to Jerusalem al Judea for the census. This was big, because prophecy said that the Messiah would be born in Judea, and this move for the census seemed to answer the prophecy. The NT mentions the name of the Governor who ordered the census - Quirinius - and this gives us another date. Quirinius was made Governor in 6AD, so the census, and the birth, must be after that. Analysis: How can a child born after 6 AD be pursued by a jealous king who died more than 10 years earlier? Chronologically speaking, both cannot be true, so one of them must be false. 3. Jesus ministry - NT says that Jesus was at least 30 when he began his ministry, and ministered @ 2 years before his death, making him at least 32 when he died. 4. Crucifixion - NT claims that the crucifixion was ordered by Governor Pontius Pilate. Pontius left office in 36 AD. Analysis of 2,3,&4: If Jesus was born after 6 AD (census) and died before 36 AD (Pontius left office), then he could not have been AT LEAST 32 when he died, and that is assuming that Quirinius ordered and completed the census on his first day as governor (impossible) and Pontius held the execution on his last day in office (highly unlikely). Add to that, biblical scholars, using New Testament references, determined that the crucifixion was April of 30 AD, making Jesus age at time of death to be less than 24 (more likely 22 or 23), not greater than 32, as the NT claims. One or all of those stories must be false, because it is chronologically impossible for them to all be true. The main reason that Christians don't spot these obvious flaws is that they don't examine these stories as a chronological whole. Trying to create a timeline of biblical stories is impossible, because so many of them are clearly conflicting, timewise, and therefore chronologically impossible when taken together. There is more than one account in the NT of Jesus last words as he died on the cross, and they aren't even remotely close. Only one account of the last words could be true, because last words are a one time deal. The rest must be false. I could go on, but you get the point, right?


What do you guys think about this ?

That the Infancy Narratives, though very important, are theology, and not biography - let alone Totally Inerrant biography.

As for the story of the Massacre of the Innocents, it is sufficiently explained by the attempt of Pharaoh in the book of Exodus to destroy all the newborn sons of the Israelites. In other words, the purpose of the story is to present Jesus as a new Moses: whether or not there was a real historical Massacre of the Innocents, is of secondary importance; at this time of day, it is probably impossible to establish whether there was one or not. The important thing is Saint Matthew’s presentation of Jesus. The reference to Egypt also recalls the dealings of King Solomon with that country, and contrasts the conduct of Jesus with Solomon’s behaviour.

For Saint Matthew, Jesus is many things: the new Moses, the new Jonah, the new Solomon, the new David. All of these are means by which Saint Matthew gets across the importance of Jesus in God’s purpose. send Matthew lays a particularly strong stress upon the kingship of Jesus, and upon his authority and its origin. This authority is shown by the incidents in which Jesus acts as Teacher, Healer, Prophet and King.

Authors outside the Bible make errors of fact, and contradict known facts, as well as each other. People do not suppose Livy and Polybius to be totally inerrant & consistent in their Histories of Rome. Livy can be substantially correct in his (very detailed) account of Rome’s war with Hannibal, without having to be infallible & inerrant in every last possible detail. His credibility and usefulness as an historian is not destroyed, the instant that he is detected in an error. Readers & historians make allowances for such things. IMHO, the NT should be read with the same lack of concern for Total Inerrancy.

The credibility of the Gospels does not collapse the instant that one allows for the possibility that Jesus’ birthplace may be Capernaum, or Nazareth, or Bethlehem, or somewhere else. His importance does not depend upon the possession of infallibly accurate knowledge of the precise place of his birth. Not, of course, that knowledge of the place of His birth is totally unimportant and of no significance whatsoever; but the lack of such knowledge does not destroy the Christian message. Other things matter a very great deal more. Such as His Crucifixion, His Resurrection from the dead, and His Ascension into heaven to the right hand of the Father. The gospel is the good news of the kingdom of God, and this kingdom is personified in, and brought in by, and established by, Jesus Christ. Christ and His Kingdom/Reign/Kingly Rule are what are important to the Gospel; the knowledge of where He was born is, in comparison, a detail of little importance.

Christianity is not based on the Bible. It is based on a Divine Person, Jesus Christ - Christian faith is in Him, because He exercises the Authority of the One Who sent Him. The clue is in the name. That is why it is called Christ-ianity, and not Bibl-ianity.

 

[hedrick]

Angela Walker I'll go to my favorite. It is actually a chronological analysis of several stories.
1. Story of the Slaughter of Innocents - Supposedly, Herod the Great heard about the newborn Jesus and sent his army out to kill all the children in the land, assuming Jesus would be among them, but the family got a divine warning and left the area. A miracle that Jesus survived, although every other child was slaughtered. Some miracle, right. Anyway, it gives us a date to work with. Herod died in 4 BCE, so the birth of Jesus was before that. 2. Census story - When Mary was near due, Joseph and Mary had to travel to Jerusalem al Judea for the census. This was big, because prophecy said that the Messiah would be born in Judea, and this move for the census seemed to answer the prophecy. The NT mentions the name of the Governor who ordered the census - Quirinius - and this gives us another date. Quirinius was made Governor in 6AD, so the census, and the birth, must be after that. Analysis: How can a child born after 6 AD be pursued by a jealous king who died more than 10 years earlier? Chronologically speaking, both cannot be true, so one of them must be false. 3. Jesus ministry - NT says that Jesus was at least 30 when he began his ministry, and ministered @ 2 years before his death, making him at least 32 when he died. 4. Crucifixion - NT claims that the crucifixion was ordered by Governor Pontius Pilate. Pontius left office in 36 AD. Analysis of 2,3,&4: If Jesus was born after 6 AD (census) and died before 36 AD (Pontius left office), then he could not have been AT LEAST 32 when he died, and that is assuming that Quirinius ordered and completed the census on his first day as governor (impossible) and Pontius held the execution on his last day in office (highly unlikely). Add to that, biblical scholars, using New Testament references, determined that the crucifixion was April of 30 AD, making Jesus age at time of death to be less than 24 (more likely 22 or 23), not greater than 32, as the NT claims. One or all of those stories must be false, because it is chronologically impossible for them to all be true. The main reason that Christians don't spot these obvious flaws is that they don't examine these stories as a chronological whole. Trying to create a timeline of biblical stories is impossible, because so many of them are clearly conflicting, timewise, and therefore chronologically impossible when taken together. There is more than one account in the NT of Jesus last words as he died on the cross, and they aren't even remotely close. Only one account of the last words could be true, because last words are a one time deal. The rest must be false. I could go on, but you get the point, right?


What do you guys think about this ?

The reason many Christians don’t spot contradictions is because their faith says there can’t be any. There are whole books filled with ways to explain away problems with the Bible.

 

[jd01]

Angela Walker I'll go to my favorite. It is actually a chronological analysis of several stories.
1. Story of the Slaughter of Innocents - Supposedly, Herod the Great heard about the newborn Jesus and sent his army out to kill all the children in the land, assuming Jesus would be among them, but the family got a divine warning and left the area. A miracle that Jesus survived, although every other child was slaughtered. Some miracle, right. Anyway, it gives us a date to work with. Herod died in 4 BCE, so the birth of Jesus was before that. 2. Census story - When Mary was near due, Joseph and Mary had to travel to Jerusalem al Judea for the census. This was big, because prophecy said that the Messiah would be born in Judea, and this move for the census seemed to answer the prophecy. The NT mentions the name of the Governor who ordered the census - Quirinius - and this gives us another date. Quirinius was made Governor in 6AD, so the census, and the birth, must be after that. Analysis: How can a child born after 6 AD be pursued by a jealous king who died more than 10 years earlier? Chronologically speaking, both cannot be true, so one of them must be false. 3. Jesus ministry - NT says that Jesus was at least 30 when he began his ministry, and ministered @ 2 years before his death, making him at least 32 when he died. 4. Crucifixion - NT claims that the crucifixion was ordered by Governor Pontius Pilate. Pontius left office in 36 AD. Analysis of 2,3,&4: If Jesus was born after 6 AD (census) and died before 36 AD (Pontius left office), then he could not have been AT LEAST 32 when he died, and that is assuming that Quirinius ordered and completed the census on his first day as governor (impossible) and Pontius held the execution on his last day in office (highly unlikely). Add to that, biblical scholars, using New Testament references, determined that the crucifixion was April of 30 AD, making Jesus age at time of death to be less than 24 (more likely 22 or 23), not greater than 32, as the NT claims. One or all of those stories must be false, because it is chronologically impossible for them to all be true. The main reason that Christians don't spot these obvious flaws is that they don't examine these stories as a chronological whole. Trying to create a timeline of biblical stories is impossible, because so many of them are clearly conflicting, timewise, and therefore chronologically impossible when taken together. There is more than one account in the NT of Jesus last words as he died on the cross, and they aren't even remotely close. Only one account of the last words could be true, because last words are a one time deal. The rest must be false. I could go on, but you get the point, right?


What do you guys think about this ?

1 & 2 present no problems as the authors simply inserted some folk tales about Jesus' birth. I go over the arguments for this in my book. But you can tell as they read as set-piece miracle stories, very different from the plain simple stories about Jesus mission later on. Also the two Gospels that were actually written by eye-witnesses John and Peter make no mention of anything special about Jesus birth.

3. I place Jesus' birth around 1 BCE to 3 CE - there is no a lot of information to go by, just a passing reference from Luke.

4. Jesus died on April 1 33 CE, the only date that fits, so he would have been around early 30s. Actually I have constructed a very reliable timeline of Jesus' mission using the best sources available. There are no contradictions that cannot be resolved. Jesus last words those as presented by John, Peter was not present and heard the story of the passage from a psalm, so we can go with John's account.

 

[Ray Glenn]

When did Herod die?

There were at least six King Herods. Which one are we trying to count backwards to?

Herod the baby killer dies shorty after the killing of the innocents. His heir is the Herod that beheads John the Baptist and holds court over Jesus.

I've got the historical Herod record sitting on my bookshelf.

 

[Ray Glenn]

Right. It's hard to believe that the versions in Matthew and Luke are both entirely true. If you believe in inerrancy, of course you can harmonize anything. But one has Jesus grow up in Egypt, the other Nazareth.

Fortunately, starting with Jesus' ministry we get a reasonably consistent story. Probably because people who saw it were still around.

Considering that Mary was still alive when most of the New Testament was written. We have the most informed witness at the hand of the authors of the Gospels. She had "first hand" knowledge.

 

[hedrick]

Considering that Mary was still alive when most of the New Testament was written. We have the most informed witness at the hand of the authors of the Gospels. She had "first hand" knowledge.

We don't know that. We also don't know they the authors consulted her. Certainly it didn't stop various consistencies from happening. I agree that there were enough people alive and enough stories told by the apostles that the events are reasonably accurate. But that doesn't make them inerrant. Further, the birth stories can't both be true. But those would have had few witnesses left.

 

[Ray Glenn]

We don't know that. We also don't know they the authors consulted her. Certainly it didn't stop various consistencies from happening. I agree that there were enough people alive and enough stories told by the apostles that the events are reasonably accurate. But that doesn't make them inerrant. Further, the birth stories can't both be true. But those would have had few witnesses left.

Considering that the Gospels state the evidence of their Gospels came from eye witnesses and Apostles. And the writings were being concluded during the testimonies of Peter and Paul, one can easily conclude that Mary was available and interviewed. Otherwise, where does the story involving Jesus and the Temple when he was 12 come from? I don't believe that Mary would be excluded from anything written about Jesus after his resurrection. You are right ...it is just an observation without proof.

 

[Andrewn]

2. Census story - When Mary was near due, Joseph and Mary had to travel to Jerusalem al Judea for the census. This was big, because prophecy said that the Messiah would be born in Judea, and this move for the census seemed to answer the prophecy. The NT mentions the name of the Governor who ordered the census - Quirinius - and this gives us another date. Quirinius was made Governor in 6AD, so the census, and the birth, must be after that. Analysis: How can a child born after 6 AD be pursued by a jealous king who died more than 10 years earlier? Chronologically speaking, both cannot be true, so one of them must be false. 3. Jesus ministry - NT says that Jesus was at least 30 when he began his ministry, and ministered @ 2 years before his death, making him at least 32 when he died.

This is the main point in your post. Professor NT Wright pointed out that the correct translation is:

Luke 2:2 This was the first census before the one when Quirinius was governor of Syria.

"Several scholars have made this point but it often gets overlooked. The Greek word, ‘protos’, with a genitive, as in this case, can mean ‘before’ rather than ‘the first’. In other words, there may have been a census before the ‘Quirinius’ one – which would then fit comfortably with Jesus being born in the reign of Herod the Great."

Professor NT Wright on whether the Nativity stories can be trusted

 

[jd01]

This is the main point in your post. Professor NT Wright pointed out that the correct translation is:

Luke 2:2 This was the first census before the one when Quirinius was governor of Syria.

"Several scholars have made this point but it often gets overlooked. The Greek word, ‘protos’, with a genitive, as in this case, can mean ‘before’ rather than ‘the first’. In other words, there may have been a census before the ‘Quirinius’ one – which would then fit comfortably with Jesus being born in the reign of Herod the Great."

Professor NT Wright on whether the Nativity stories can be trusted

Why would there be a Roman census in Judea before it became part of the Roman Empire? That makes no sense. The best answer is that Luke simply got it wrong, he was not there and was writing 60 years later. He obviously cobbled together various bits of folklore that conflicted. This is straight forward.

 

[jd01]

Considering that the Gospels state the evidence of their Gospels came from eye witnesses and Apostles. And the writings were being concluded during the testimonies of Peter and Paul, one can easily conclude that Mary was available and interviewed. Otherwise, where does the story involving Jesus and the Temple when he was 12 come from? I don't believe that Mary would be excluded from anything written about Jesus after his resurrection. You are right ...it is just an observation without proof.

I agree. No doubt Mary was around and available. I don't think she was excluded it is simply that she had nothing of interest to relate. Jesus had a normal upbringing, Peter and John neither mention anything special, which is very important. In fact, when Jesus started his mission Mary and his brothers thought he was out of his mind and wanted to take him away. This can't be true if all of the birth narrative stories were true.

 

[YahuahSaves]

Angela Walker I'll go to my favorite. It is actually a chronological analysis of several stories.
1. Story of the Slaughter of Innocents - Supposedly, Herod the Great heard about the newborn Jesus and sent his army out to kill all the children in the land, assuming Jesus would be among them, but the family got a divine warning and left the area. A miracle that Jesus survived, although every other child was slaughtered. Some miracle, right. Anyway, it gives us a date to work with. Herod died in 4 BCE, so the birth of Jesus was before that. 2. Census story - When Mary was near due, Joseph and Mary had to travel to Jerusalem al Judea for the census. This was big, because prophecy said that the Messiah would be born in Judea, and this move for the census seemed to answer the prophecy. The NT mentions the name of the Governor who ordered the census - Quirinius - and this gives us another date. Quirinius was made Governor in 6AD, so the census, and the birth, must be after that. Analysis: How can a child born after 6 AD be pursued by a jealous king who died more than 10 years earlier? Chronologically speaking, both cannot be true, so one of them must be false. 3. Jesus ministry - NT says that Jesus was at least 30 when he began his ministry, and ministered @ 2 years before his death, making him at least 32 when he died. 4. Crucifixion - NT claims that the crucifixion was ordered by Governor Pontius Pilate. Pontius left office in 36 AD. Analysis of 2,3,&4: If Jesus was born after 6 AD (census) and died before 36 AD (Pontius left office), then he could not have been AT LEAST 32 when he died, and that is assuming that Quirinius ordered and completed the census on his first day as governor (impossible) and Pontius held the execution on his last day in office (highly unlikely). Add to that, biblical scholars, using New Testament references, determined that the crucifixion was April of 30 AD, making Jesus age at time of death to be less than 24 (more likely 22 or 23), not greater than 32, as the NT claims. One or all of those stories must be false, because it is chronologically impossible for them to all be true. The main reason that Christians don't spot these obvious flaws is that they don't examine these stories as a chronological whole. Trying to create a timeline of biblical stories is impossible, because so many of them are clearly conflicting, timewise, and therefore chronologically impossible when taken together. There is more than one account in the NT of Jesus last words as he died on the cross, and they aren't even remotely close. Only one account of the last words could be true, because last words are a one time deal. The rest must be false. I could go on, but you get the point, right?


What do you guys think about this ?

Perhaps going by the Roman calendar is the reason.

 

[Ceallaigh]

The reason many Christians don’t spot contradictions is because their faith says there can’t be any. There are whole books filled with ways to explain away problems with the Bible.

So explainations of perceived contradictions should be dismissed based on that accusation? How convenient.

 

[Andrewn]

The NT mentions the name of the Governor who ordered the census - Quirinius - and this gives us another date. Quirinius was made Governor in 6AD, so the census, and the birth, must be after that. Analysis: How can a child born after 6 AD be pursued by a jealous king who died more than 10 years earlier? Chronologically speaking, both cannot be true, so one of them must be false.

The famous scholar N.T. Wright translates the verse as follows:

Luk 2:2 This was the first census, before the one when Quirinius was governor of Syria. (NTE © 2011).

IOW, the Nativity census took place _before_ the famous census of 6 AD. Most biblical scholars generally accept a date of birth between 6 BC and 4 BC. Tertullian (c. 160 – 225 AD), the Christian law expert from Carthage in North Africa, wrote that Jesus was born while Gaius Sentius Saturninus was legate of Syria.