ascribed = applied?

Forums: English, Esl, Grammar
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Context:
In Humphreys' theory, Jesus went by an old-fashioned Jewish calendar rather than the official lunar calendar which was in widespread use at the time of his death and is still in use today.

This would put the Passover meal -- and the Last Supper -- on the Wednesday, explaining how such a large number of events took place between the meal and the crucifixion.

It would follow that Jesus' arrest, interrogation and separate trials did not all take place in the space of one night but in fact occurred over a longer period.

Humphreys believes a date could therefore be ascribed to Easter in our modern solar calendar, and working on the basis that the crucifixion took place on April 3, Easter Day would be on April 5.

More:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110418/wl_uk_afp/britainreligionchristianseaster

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 693 • Replies: 7

No top replies

@oristarA,

What he's saying is that if, all things being equal, that if Jesus really did die, around this time of year, under the circumstances we're all been led to believe, than the dates don't measure up. He stating that there is no way all the events could have happened all on the same night, and if all these events did occur, then, our understanding of the events is skewed. The ascribed dates, the assigned dates are wrong and his dates of the events are much more plausible.

1 Reply

@Ceili,

Ceili wrote:

What he's saying is that if, all things being equal, that if Jesus really did die, around this time of year, under the circumstances we're all been led to believe, than the dates don't measure up. He stating that there is no way all the events could have happened all on the same night, and if all these events did occur, then, our understanding of the events is skewed. The ascribed dates, the assigned dates are wrong and his dates of the events are much more plausible.

Thank you.

BTW: I think "than" should be "then."

1 Reply

Quote:

BTW: I think "than" should be "then."

correct.

You're getting too good Oristar.

0 Replies

@oristarA,

Ori, you are correct, I am a notoriously bad speller. I make frequent mistakes, it is a heavy burden. Smile

Good on you for pointing it out though. I think you'd kick my butt in any english grammar or spelling test on earth. The student has become the master.

http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs7/i/2005/184/6/5/_gong__by_clairebearer.gif

2 Replies

@Ceili,

Ceili wrote:

Ori, you are correct, I am a notoriously bad speller. I make frequent mistakes, it is a heavy burden. Good on you for pointing it out though. I think you'd kick my butt in any english grammar or spelling test on earth. The student has become the master.

To err is human. A minor mistake will never deny the fact that you are a good teacher here, at least for me.

0 Replies

@Ceili,

That's not really a spelling mistake, Ceili, it's a phonological mixup. It's exceedingly common here at A2K. You see it with too too.

Oops, I forgot, in English we aren't supposed to double words. Embarrassed

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

That's not really a spelling mistake, Ceili, it's a phonological mixup. It's exceedingly common here at A2K. You see it with too too.

Oops, I forgot, in English we aren't supposed to double words.

But there have been doubled words in good English writings for a long, long time. Wink

0 Replies

ascribed = applied?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know