Jesus May Have Been Born Years After Pope Thinks, Claims Incoming Anglican Archbishop

December 8, 2012 by  
Filed under Uncategorized, Vatican

CANTERBURY––The “mistake” was made by 21st century Pope and scholar known as Benedict XVI or God’s Rottweiler, the incoming Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby claims in his new book, Christ of Nazareth: The Baby Narratives, published on Thursday. “The Pope claims that the calculation of the beginning of our calendar, that being based on the birth of Jesus, was made by Dionysius Exiguus, who made a mistake in his calculations by several years…meaning that Jesus may have born years earlier than traditionally believed,” Welby says in his book. “Logically speaking, Jesus must have been born during the year 1, otherwise now would really be around the year 2004, and Pope John Paul ll would still be alive, which means that Pope Benedict would only be Cardinal Ratzinger, and not Pope Benedict, as is the name on his new book. As you can see, his argument is self-refuting.” Welby, known as a scholar in his own right, believes that Benedict XVI also makes other miscalculations in his new book when he claims that there were no donkeys or oxen in the manger during the Lord’s birth. “So then, dear people, how would one reconcile the Pope’s claims with the fact that in my home, at this very moment, there is a nativity scene beneath my flatscreen, within which lies an Ox, happily resting on a pile of cotton made to look like snow?”

  • Panda Rosa

    And now we’re left wondering what number to print on next year’s calendars. 2013? 2024? 2004? I thought the Pope was supposed to be infallible!
    BTW, it’s just been revealed that the Mayan Calendar Apocalypse refers to the death of Dick Clark.

    • Al Cassady

      Infallible on things pretaining to Faith and Morals, but otherwise he has a right ot opinions just as U and I do.

  • Brenden Thompson

    That quote from Welby is ridiculous of course when the gregorian calendar was being applied based on incorrect information by Dionysius Exiguus, then when the Pope seeks to correct it’s going to be a few years before the incorrect date, there is nothing slightly logical about what Welby is saying, he is working from the current possibly incorrect date. Pope actually says there is no biblical evidence in the Nativity narratives to suggest animals but does point to donkey and ox in a prophesy in Isaiah, so actually helps the idea, completely taking out of context of the quote. Nativity scene’s are probably based on recreations of the first by St. Francis of Assisi in the 13th century. Pope was writing a book as an academic, not claiming to speak infallibly, so he would welcome being called wrong

    • Roberto

      Brenden, you may not have noticed, but this is a satirical site, akin to The Onion. See if you can find any other reference to this fictitious book by Welby.
      This site is great, but we need to advertise its nature more. :)

    • Catholic

      Brendan! It’s all a joke! THIS IS NOT A REAL NEWS SOURCE!

    • Rose

      Just an fyi, all the posts on this site are satirical. So this did not actually happen, it’s a fake to prove a point. =)

    • Lucas

      ^I love when people mistake the stories on this website for “serious” news items; sometimes their frustrated responses are funnier than the stories themselves.

  • Tony

    I’m totally confused on the math – can someone help me out? The title says that Jesus may have been born years AFTER (when the Pople thinks). But isn’t the common belief (and the Pope’s) that Jesus was born after 1 A.D.? So then wouldn’t the Archbishop, by saying that Jesus was born in 1 A.D., be stating that Jesus may have been born BEFORE (not after) when the Pope thinks He was born? What am I missing?

    • Chris

      Tony,
      You got trolled. Satirical site. Don’t try to make sense of the math.

      • Tony

        Uh, boy. I know it’s not real. But there is still an internal logic to the “articles.” The “facts” generally make sense, internally, in order to be believable. Eye has made other corrections (head of CDF). I was pointing out what I thought was an internal error, that’s all.

    • http://irishpilgrim.blogspot.com/ Eamonn

      What you’re missing, Tony, is that this is a satirical website. This whole story is a big joke!

      • Tony

        I know it’s not real. But there is still an internal logic to the “articles.” The “facts” generally make sense, internally, in order to be believable. Eye has made other corrections (head of CDF). I was pointing out what I thought was an internal error, that’s all.

    • masterjedi747

      “But isn’t the common belief (and the Pope’s) that Jesus was born after 1 A.D.?”

      Other way around. The proposed idea is that Jesus was born somewhere in the range of approx. 4-2 B.C.

  • RocketSurgeon

    I suppose now would be a bad time to interject the “Christmas is a pagan holiday” vs. “Biblical clues point more to around Passover” for the actual birth of Christ thing, since that would throw things off by another year either way. Unless it’s a backward progression. Which would be a regression.

    K thx bai.

  • Jes

    For those not in the know, Jesus was probably born between 7-4 BC ( Herod the Great died in 4BC). The monk who originally did the calculations, Dionysius Exegesis made a few mistakes, including forgetting a year zero when Jesus should have been born. It was a tricky job and he did his best.
    The Catholic Church has know this for a very long time, as we also know that Jesus was not actually born on the 25 th December. Sheep and shepherds are only in the fields at night between May and October, after which it is too cold. Nevertheless certain groups spring this out at regular intervals as if it were news. ( not generally the same groups who come out with the Resurection as metaphor, which it isn’t).

  • Lee Bacchi

    Actually, we would be around A.D. 2018 and 2021. We would add 4-7 years to the AD dating, not subtract them. Or am I missing something here?

  • Lee Bacchi

    But how about the serious idea that Jews believed you were conceived on the same date (not same day) you died? If Jesus’ death was around March 25, then conception was also on a March 25,and thus may have been born around December 25.