What was the weather like at Jesus Christ's death?

Answer 1

What marvelous events occurred at the time of the crucifixion? Matthew: "There was darkness over all the land" (xxvii, 45). "The veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose" (51, 52). Mark and Luke: "There was darkness over the whole land" (Mark xv, 33). "And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom" (38). Mark and Luke know nothing of two of the important events related by Matthew; John is ignorant of all of them. Had these events really happened, the naturalists and chroniclers of that age would have recorded them. As they make no mention of them, we know that they did not occur. If we accept the claims of their followers, nearly all the gods and heroes of antiquity expired amid the convulsions of Nature. The soul of Romulus went out amid the battling of her elements; "the sun was darkened and the sky rained fire and ashes" when the Hindu Krishna left his saddened followers; "the earth shook, the rocks were rent, the graves opened, and in a storm which threatened the dissolution of the universe," when Prometheus closed his earthly career, a pall of darkness settled over Egypt when her Osiris died; the death of Alexander was succeeded by six hours of preternatural gloom; and -- "Ere the mighty Julius fell, The grave stood tenantless, and the sheeted dead Did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets." ....on the left for information on the crucifixion darkness. How long did the darkness last? Synoptics: From the sixth to the ninth hour (Matt. xxvii, 45; Mark xv, 33; Luke xxiii, 44). According to Matthew and Luke this darkness lasted from the time that he was suspended upon the cross until he died. Yet his executioners are ignorant of it. Luke says: "His acquaintances, and the women that followed him from Galilee, stood afar off, beholding these things [the crucifixion]" (xxiii, 49), which they could not have done had this darkness really occurred. If this darkness occurred, and began at the sixth hour, as stated by the Synoptics, then, according to John, the conclusion of the trial, the sentencing of Jesus, the preparations for his execution, and the journey to Golgotha, all took place during the darkness, a conclusion which the nature of the narrative utterly precludes. Christian apologists have cited Phlegon who notices an eclipse which occurred about this time. But there is a variance of at least six years in regard to the time that Jesus was crucified. Besides an eclipse could not have occurred within two weeks of a Passover, on the occurrence of which he is declared to have been executed. Farrar says: "It could have been no darkness of any natural eclipse, for the Paschal moon was at the full" (Life of Christ, p. 505). Geikie says: "It is impossible to explain the origin of this darkness. The Passover moon was then at the full, so that it could not have been an eclipse. The earlier fathers, relying on a notice of an eclipse that seemed to coincide in time, though it really did not, fancied that the darkness was caused by it, but incorrectly" (Life of Christ, Vol. II, p. 624, Notes). "The celebrated passage of Phlegon," says Gibbon, "is now wisely abandoned" (Rome, Vol. I, p. 589, Note). Assuming the questioner is referring to the unusual darkness which occurred while Christ was on the cross:

1. Darkness due to an eclipse is excluded as we know that the Jewish Passover (which occurred at this time) was and is to this day held at the time of a full moon. Solar eclipses cannot occur at this time.

2. The time of day excludes the darkness of nighttime as Matthew Mark and Luke use the Jewish time system to tell us it occurred between the sixth and ninth hours. Bearing in mind that this system counts hours of 'day' up from the beginning of sunrise this places the time around midday to three. However John when referring to the time of the crucifixion uses Roman time as he does in other parts of his writings. Also the hours are not exact times as we in our clock and watch world assume. (A sundial was the measure of exact time). Thus the time accounts all point to a daytime occurrence.

3. This was after all a supernatural upheaval connected with one of the most powerful events in history. The fact that it cannot be readily explained does not mean that it did not occur. No supernatural event by definition can be. However it cannot be disproved readily either. The variations in the accounts add credibility which would not be the case if all agreed on all points. Anyone who has spent time in a courtroom will appreciate the point that accounts of the same event vary.

4. Other histories outside of the Gospels support their accounts. For example

Eusebius in Ecclesiastical History and Tertullian in Apology had referred to the fact that the non-Christians had records in their writings of a sudden withdrawal of the sun. Thallus and Phlegon both assumed it was an eclipse and the latter did actually fix it accurately at 33AD (the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad) in his Chronicles.

5. The darkness did not occur in isolation and was accompanied at the end by other phenomena such as earthquakes graves opening and the thick temple curtain tearing from top to bottom which are also attested in various sources.

No other author who mentions Thallus before Syncellus makes any mention of Thallus' supposed reference to the darkness. Some would expect Christians to make a great deal of such a reference on the part of a well-known chronographer and historian if it supported Christian belief. Africanus may here be in error or Thallus may have only put forth the idea that the darkness that Christians claimed occurred at the death of Jesus was a normal eclipse of the Sun, perhaps referring to the eclipse of the Sun that occurred in AD 29. On the other hand, each fragment contains entirely unique material, referenced just once. Thallus' reference to the crucifixion would only be useful to Christians once the historicity of the gospel events came into question. This would explain why Africanus is the only early Christian writer to cite Thallus. Logically, Thallus would not have felt the need to offer an alternative explanation of the darkness occurring at the crucifixion if he had not been persuaded that it had actually happened. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thallus_%28historian%29

Answer 2

AnswerBethlehem is in a dry temperate mountainous region. We do not know at what time of year he would have been born, but the presence of shepherds in Luke's Gospel suggests that the birth would have taken place in the warmer months. Nights would have been cold, but the days quite warm or hot. Rain is comparatively sparse.

Answer 3

There are a number of historians who do not believe Jesus was born in December, and the fact that the New Testament says the shepherds were outside with their flocks gives some credence to this belief. Some sources believe Jesus was probably born in the spring or summer, rather than in the winter. But whatever your belief, the climate of the Middle East tends to be hot, although it does cool down during the winter months and the nights would be cool at that time.

Answer 4

It is not known what the weather was like during the Crucifixion - it isn't mentioned. There was darkness, but this was not caused by weather.

Answer 5

well The Bible's illustrations, art galleries and what other pics ive seen it was a clear stary night sky.

Answer 6

warm nd sunny everywhere was nice and warm

Answer 7

That was not recorded in the Bible. They would have had no way of determining such a thin back then, nor is this in anyway important.