Anti-Mythicism

Calendar

A calendar error is not an argument that Jesus never existed.

Responding to mythicism.web.app/calendar

Claim headings and boxes summarise the source; consult the linked page for its original wording.

1 claim examined8 citations1 figure

The response

A calendar error is not an argument that Jesus never existed.

Dating conventions concern how later societies numbered years. Mythicism needs evidence about the movement’s origins, not a demonstration that medieval chronological calculations were imperfect.

The calendar argument never supplies the missing link to nonexistence. The origin of a numbering convention and the life of the person associated with it are different historical questions.

Imagined portrait of Dionysius Exiguus
Fig. 1 Dionysius Exiguus, deviser of the Anno Domini count, in a later imagined portrait. Wikimedia Commons

"The AD system is a human invention from 525 CE"

Source claim (summary): Dionysius Exiguus created the Anno Domini system in 525 CE. AD means "in the year of our Lord," not "after death." The Julian calendar (45 BCE) drifted; Gregory XIII corrected it in 1582. The weekdays are named for the Sun, Moon, Tyr, Woden, Thor, Frigg and Saturn.

All correct, including the always-worthwhile correction of "after death." Dionysius, computing Easter tables in Rome, replaced the era of Diocletian ("the persecutor") with years reckoned ab incarnatione Domini; Bede's popularity spread the system; Charlemagne's chancery institutionalised it. Two additions complete the picture:

Dionysius probably got the year wrong – and scholarship says so freely. Matthew's nativity requires Herod the Great (died 4 BCE); Luke's census points at 6 CE; the datable anchor is Luke 3:1's "fifteenth year of Tiberius" (28/29 CE) with Jesus "about thirty." The standard critical estimate therefore puts the birth c. 6–4 BCE – meaning Jesus was born "before Christ" on Dionysius's own numbering. This is in every reference work, and it teaches the method: a sixth-century computist's arithmetic is checked against first-century administrative pegs (Herod's death, Tiberius's accession, Pilate's prefecture 26–36) and found a few years off. The pegs are the evidence; the era is bookkeeping. Nobody dates the existence of anyone by the label on the timeline – a miscalculated era no more unmakes its reference point than Rome's confused ab urbe condita reckonings unmake the city.

The weekday names make the useful control case. Yes: English weekdays enshrine Germanic and Roman gods, just as December 25 was assigned in the fourth century (the Gospels give no birth date, and Christmas's placement near the solstice festivals is conventional church history, not a discovery – the standard scholarly discussions are happy to say "we don't know Jesus's birthday and the date is liturgical"). Cultures wrap their calendars around gods, heroes and rulers indiscriminately: Wednesday no more attests Odin's historicity than AD attests the incarnation – and, symmetrically, no more refutes it. July is named for Julius Caesar and August for Augustus: same mechanism, real men. Calendars record what a culture honoured, not what existed; the existence question is settled by first-century documents, and those have their own pages here – Paul, Josephus, Tacitus.

How the era spread
Dionysius Exiguus525devises the AD count for Easter tables
Bedeearly 8th c.popularises the era
Charlemagnec. 800his chancery institutionalises it
Gregory XIII1582corrects the Julian drift

Full bibliography

  1. Georges Declercq, Anno Domini: The Origins of the Christian Era (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000).
  2. Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, updated ed. (New York: Doubleday, 1993).
  3. Susan K. Roll, Toward the Origins of Christmas (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1995).
  4. E. G. Richards, Mapping Time (Oxford: OUP, 1998).

Figures

  1. Fig. 1 · Dionysius Exiguus, deviser of the Anno Domini count, in a later imagined portrait. Wikimedia Commons