Talk:4 BC

I've heard this 4 BC as being the most likely date of Jesus' birth before. Given the general lack of primary sources about Jesus, and even laying the challenge to his historicity aside for the moment, is quoting an actual "most likely year of birth" really appropriate? I'd like to see some justification by someone who knows why 4BC is the most likely.User:J.F.Quackenbush

My recollection is that the date is based on Roman records of when a census was taken, and astronomical calculations of when a bright object might have been seen in the sky and called a "star" (a term not as narrowly defined 2000 years ago as it is today). Vicki Rosenzweig

Considering that there are no extant Roman records referring to Jesus, nor any of the major events recorded in the Gospels, it hardly seems like that's a good argument. THe astronomic point is interesting, but if there were a major cosmological event in 4 BC, it seems that it would be more appropriate to list that as the occurence, with a note pointing out that the proximity of that event to 1 AD has postulated that this year is postulated as being the year of Jesus' birthday. I still don't particularly care for the argument though, because it's a bit circular and assumes that the Star of Bethlehem story is literal truth. JFQ