The Date Jesus Was Born

Introduction – Full Version
The following introduction is my work, along with the formula concerning Christ’s death and resurrection after the heading of “My Conclusion,”

This is a very brief summation of the work originally produced by Sir Robert Anderson over 100 years ago.

However, there has been scholarship before and after that deal with the same considerations and come to the same conclusion.

What follows after “My Conclusion” is a short article by Chuck Missler, which utilizes some of the same original work, but presented in a brief outline form and is excellent. 

It is unfortunate that the church at large seems to miss these important issues because of their superficiality in handling God’s Word. 

However, in these last days, it is individuals such as Sir Robert Anderson (1841-1918), and many others that have increased our knowledge based upon the guidance of the Holy Spirit, wherein for the last hundred years this teaching has been available, yet, sometimes hard to find. 

Sir Robert Anderson’s original work, “The Coming Prince” was originally published in the 1890s until sometime after World War II.  A few decades ago it was republished again displaying insights and considerations which far surpass our current prior insights, and is currently republished to date. 

What makes the following information so important is that it not only relies on God’s Word, but recorded secular history which cannot be manipulated by religious interest. 

If we would simply take God’s Word as fact rather than fiction, utilizing the inspiration and direction of the Holy Spirit as we approach world history, there would be many more mysterious Biblical questions answered. 

What’s so unusual is that when you read through the following information it becomes so obvious, that one wonders how the church went these many centuries asking “when was Jesus born,” when the answer is so obvious to (in Luke 3:1) one if they would be a student of God’s Word, one who would also search out world history to find where it coincides with God’s Word, and thus find such treasures of truth.

One of the important reasons why the birth date of Christ is important is in understanding Daniel 9:24-27, which predicts the very day that the Messiah would present Himself to Israel, which we refer to as the “Triumphant Entry”(Please see my essay entitled: “The Preeminence of Christ ~ Part 5 ~ A Prophecy of When the Messiah Would Arrive ~ The Details” ~ LINK, if you do not know what I’m talking about).  

It is quite understandable why the church has seemingly forgotten Jesus’ birth date. 

The reason why is that while the birth of Christ (Christ being a title, rather than a name; meaning: “anointed of the Lord,” to the unlearned unbeliever this title may not have any special connotations, perhaps referring to any King.  However,  when used with the particular article, “the,” indicating that it is a singular reference to an individual, that to the Jew is more than a man, more than a deliverer, even more than a governor, the most important person in all of human history, to the Believer – God’s Own Son, Jesus the Christ) is important, it becomes important to a secular world because a prophet, a wise man; yet a mere man was born in the un-believer’s eyes. 

The Resurrection 
However, to the believer, the focus of attention is not on the birth of an individual that the world considers a man, but in the resurrection of a man who was God incarnate. 

To the world He was a man, to the believer He is divine. 

This is why the church has always focused on the resurrection, rather than the birth of Christ

It seems like the Holy Spirit engineered it this way in order to keep the churches primary focus on what was most important, the resurrection (Remembering that there are no coincidences within God’s kingdom, either God is in control of everything, and therefore “God,” or He’s in control of nothing.  If something can happen outside of His Own Will, how can you trust anything He says, because it may be one of those things that is beyond His own will to do, maybe because we live in a sinful world?  NO! This is God’s kingdom, it is His creation; even though it has become sinful because of man, God is still the Boss.  This is the basis that man has as a foundation for faith, that nothing can happen to man outside of God’s will.  And for those that would say that God simply allows His creation to run its own course – they do not pay attention to God’s Word which declares otherwise.  In which God’s Word displays prophecy after prophecy wherein God has, and will manipulate time to come out as He would choose; even within a sinful world.  This is why you and I can trust Him, not just that He has the will to do what is good, but just as importantly; that He has the ability to do what He says)

As Paul says, if the resurrection is a lie; everything that the believer believes is a lie as well (1 Cor. 15:14,17), because as stated in Romans 1:3-4:

“Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.”

Everything hinges on the resurrection.  There has never been a man who has prophesied his own death, and then resurrection; which would validate his teachings, as Christ has done.  The resurrection is a display of the power of God validating Christ’s ministry and words. 

Yet, there is also prophetic considerations concerning Christ’s birth, where in time prophecies will come into play; which would be another reason why God would hide in plain sight this knowledge, so that the creation would not always know what the Creator was doing in advance. 

Lucifer is another good example why God would do this. 

He knows the Bible probably better than any human, so how does God fulfill His Will, as told in advance, when His enemy has His playbook in his hand. 

It is God displaying His divinity, as also through His intelligence that He hides in plain sight those things that He wishes to reveal in time, yet at His own good pleasure. 

And as previously stated, using prophecy God hides in plain sight His plans, which give reasons to have faith in God; one of the two major Biblical prophets, Daniel (The Old Testament great prophet, and one of the New Testament great prophets, John; wherein there was a special notation that they are both “loved” of God ~ Daniel 9:23 and John 13:23.  Both of which have special prophecies concerning the End Days, more than any others; it is Daniel who speaks about when the Messiah would be revealed on the stage of time.  This is why so many understood that it was in the days of Jesus, that the Messiah would soon appear), tells us that in the last days God will increase knowledge.  Knowledge that man will use to his own ends; however, knowledge that God uses to inform His followers in understanding God’s Word as never before. 

It is Daniel, that in the last chapter of his book (We understand that the Bible was not created with chapter and verses, which were created in the 12th and 15th century – but that in the last part of Daniel’s writing which we would refer to as the 12th chapter), speaks about the “Last Days,” where God says through this prophet:

But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.”  (Daniel 12:4)

Many have interpreted this Scripture to indicate that knowledge in general, and therefore technology in particular would increase in the last days, which is true. 

If we read this Scripture from the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, the Greek translation that was used primarily by Jesus (Except while reading the Hebrew text in the synagogue or temple, or certain quotations ~ however, most of the time Jesus quotes the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, therefore validating it – which also explains why many times a New Testament quotation of the Old Testament sounds different than its original Old Testament wording.  In the New Testament, Jesus and the apostles were quoting from the Septuagint Greek Old Testament, while you and I turn back the pages of our English translation of the Bible, and we read the narrative according to the Hebrew Masoretic text – therefore the to sound different, because the translations are different), the word here for “knowledge” is the Greek word gnosis (G1108), and means “knowledge,” “science,” which would be a reference to our general increase in knowledge, which would include technology. 

Yet, the word has a dual meaning which also implies “to know,” or “to perceive,” which would represent an understanding of a particular nature – singular in its meaning, which according to the context, would be God’s Word. 

Therefore, this expression very easily refers to both knowledge which is general (conntatively), and knowledge which is specific (denotatively) ; as the Greek grammar allows. 

The word “increased” is the Greek word plethuno; from plethos (G4128), which means “make multitude, “to make full,” hence, “to multiply.”  Indicating that the increase is not minimal, not even great; but is to the extent that it is almost complete – to multiply and make full.

The reason this passage become so important concerning prophecy in the “Last Days” (End Times); is that during the last two hundred years or so, more has become known about God’s Word than at any other time in history.

Due to archeological digs over the last few centuries; we have discovered many manuscripts of the Bible which are also cross-referenced in other languages, giving us a much more in-depth knowledge concerning the Hebrew and Greek words used in the Word of God.

You and I have a greater ability to open our Bible, word studies, Bible dictionaries, Bible commentaries, and Greek New Testament’s, Greek Old Testament, and Hebrew Old Testament (All three in their original language ~ I’m referring to Byzantine manuscripts which make up the “Textus Receptus,” as well as the “Majority Text” manuscripts; not the “Alexandrian Codices[sometimes referred to as the “Eclectic” manuscripts] which are defiled, and introduce many errors – I know this is controversial.   I used to be a follower of James White and Bruce Metzger, yet through thorough original research over many decades have come to see the error of these translations that have been found since the early 18th century.  If anybody is interested in the subject of Bible translation, rather “Lower Criticism” [the original form of Bible study concerning translation, where the focus was on “what” God’s Word had to say] or “Higher Criticism” [which came after the Enlightenment from the German translators who did not believe in the inspiration of the Scripture, or the deity of Jesus Christ.  Those that introduced a different type of Bible examination, following after Tischendorf, then later Westcott & Hort, then Eberhard & his son Erwin Nestle, and now  today Bruce Metzger; wherein the focus is on “who” wrote the individual books – which mandated that the Scriptures were not inspired of God, but written by man]; please let me know.  And I am more than willing to publish these well-documented essays.  And I’m not referring to the King James ONLY extremist that abuse integrity stating that the English translation is the only inspired book of God, and that the Greek manuscripts from which they came, are not.) and learn more about what God’s Word truly means, that any other time in man’s history.  

In fact we are so inundated with knowledge that the old adage, “familiarity breeds contempt” has unfortunately come into play, with many Christians not utilizing the vast knowledge concerning God and His Word that are free to any that would have an Internet connection; unlike our forefathers, who starved for this knowledge of God and His Word. 

One of the reflections of a lack of individual stewardship concerning studying God’s Word is seen in the question that is repeated in the churches, “when was Christ born.” 

For over 150 years this question is been answered, yet few are aware. 

I personally became aware of this subject over 30 years ago; please check it out for yourself. 

Look up the Scriptures and the secular history; because prophecy in “Last Days,” and especially the faith that can be gained by coming to understand Daniel 9:24-27, are immense. 

My Conclusion
Before I present C
huck’s article which is very thorough concerning secular history, let me give the simplest proof I know of based upon Luke 3:1, which can help determine when Christ was crucified.  If we know when Jesus was crucified, and we understand that He was 33 and half years old when this occurred, we can determine when He was born by counting backwards 33 1/2 years.  This is the basis for Sir Robert Anderson’s book “The Coming Prince,” published in the 1890s.

Luke 3:1, which dates the start of Jesus ministry, when he was 30 years old (Luke 3:23, “about” – He was 30 1/2) at Passover, in April;   

Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene.

Luke 3:22, is where Jesus enters the scene, at the same time. 

..  Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

To summarize, Sir Robert Anderson’s work; according to Luke 3:1, Jesus started his Ministry during (in) the 15th year of Tiberius.  Tiberias was appointed during the year 14 AD (Augustus died August 19, 14 AD), therefore Jesus started his public Ministry in the year 29 AD.

We know that according to scripture Jesus was crucified on the fourth Passover after starting his public Ministry by utilizing the four Gospels, 3 are which are synoptic (Matthew, Mark, Luke) and can be aligned chronologically.

Therefore Jesus was crucified on Passover, the 14th of Nisan (Hebrew calendar) in the year 32, which would’ve been April 10 in the year 32 AD on the Gregorian calendar.  Jesus being 33 1/2 years old on this date, counting backwards would mean that He was born 1 BC in the autumn,  around the first of the Hebrew month, “Tishri,” at the last of the month September on the Gregorian calendar, right around the “Feast of Trumpets.

This paragraph is probably one of the most insightful determinations to affect the Christian world, if one also consider Sir Robert Anderson’s of valuation of Daniel 9:24-27; which presents the day that the Messiah would declare himself on the 10th of Nisan in the year 32, which again validates the above determination.

“Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17)   

It was but a few decades ago that I ran across the work of Sir Robert Anderson, and came to understand the meaning of Daniel chapter 9:24-27 (Again, please see my essay entitled: “The Preeminence of Christ ~ Part 5 ~ A Prophecy of When the Messiah Would Arrive ~ The Details” ~LINK, if you do not know what I’m talking about), and how it mashed with the above understanding of when our Lord was crucified, yet also when He was born. 

It was these considerations of God’s Word that transformed my faith in ways that I cannot communicate.  The stark reality of these prophecies that were fulfilled by our Messiah are beyond human dispute, and therefore have grown my faith based upon God’s Word, that time can never diminish.

bb

The following was written by Koinonia House

Introduction

Each year at Christmas we celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. After the New Year, we struggle to remember to add a year as we date our checks, which should remind us that the entire Western World reckons its calendar from the birth of the One who changed the world more than any other before or since. Yet, it is disturbing to discover that much of what we have been taught about the Christmas season seems to be more tradition than truth.

Most serious Bible students realize that Jesus was probably not born on December 25th. The shepherds had their flocks in open fields, which implies a date prior to October. Furthermore, no competent Roman administrator would require registration involving travel during the season when Judea was generally impassable.

If Jesus wasn’t born on December 25, just when was he born? Although the Bible doesn’t explicitly identify the birthday of our Lord, many scholars have developed diverse opinions as to the likely birthday of Jesus.

The early Christian church did not celebrate Jesus’ birth, and therefore the exact date was not preserved in festivals. The first recorded mention of December 25th is in the Calendar of Philocalus (AD 354), which assumed Jesus’ birth to be Friday, December 25th, AD 1.

This was subsequent to Constantine’s Edict of Toleration in AD 313, which officially ended the government-sanctioned persecution of the Christians.

The date of December 25th, which was officially proclaimed by the church fathers in AD 440, was actually a vestige of the Roman holiday of Saturnalia, observed near the winter solstice, which itself was among the many pagan traditions inherited from the earlier Babylonian priesthood.

The year of Jesus’ birth is broadly accepted as 4 BC, primarily from erroneous conclusions derived from Josephus’ recording of an eclipse, assumed to be on March 13, 4 BC, “shortly before Herod died.” There are a number of problems with this in addition to the fact that it was more likely the eclipse occurred on December 29, 1 B.C. Considerable time elapsed between Jesus’ birth and Herod’s death since the family fled to Egypt to escape Herod’s edict and they didn’t return until after Herod’s death. Furthermore, Herod died on January 14, 1 BC.

Tertullian (born about 160 AD) stated that Augustus began to rule 41 years before the birth of Jesus and died 15 years after that event. Augustus died on August 19, 14 AD, placing Jesus’ birth at 2 BC. Tertullian also notes that Jesus was born 28 years after the death of Cleopatra in 30 BC, which is consistent with a date of 2 BC.  Irenaeus, born about a century after Jesus, also notes that the Lord was born in the 41st year of the reign of Augustus. Since Augustus began his reign in the autumn of 43 BC, this also appears to substantiate the birth in 2 BC.

Eusebius (264-340 AD), the “Father of Church History,” ascribes it to the 42nd year of the reign of Augustus and the 28th from the subjection of Egypt on the death of Anthony and Cleopatra. The 42nd year of Augustus ran from the autumn of 2 BC to the autumn of 1 BC. The subjugation of Egypt into the Roman Empire occurred in the autumn of 30 BC. The 28th year extended from the autumn of 3 BC to the autumn of 2 BC. The only date that would meet both of these constraints would be the autumn of 2 BC.

Another approach in determining the date of Jesus’ birth is from information about John the Baptist. Elisabeth, John’s mother, was a cousin of Mary and the wife of a priest named Zacharias who was of the “course” of Abijah (Priests were divided into 24 courses and each course officiated in the Temple for one week, from Sabbath to Sabbath).

When the Temple was destroyed by Titus on August 5, 70 AD, the first course of priests had just taken office. Since the course of Abijah was the eighth course, we can track backwards and determine that Zacharias would have ended his duties on July 13, 3 BC.

If the birth of John took place 280 days later, it would have been on April 19-20, 2 BC (precisely on Passover of that year).

John began his ministry in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar. The minimum age for the ministry was 30. As Augustus died on August 19, 14 AD, that was the accession year for Tiberius.

If John was born on April 19-20, 2 BC, his 30th birthday would have been April 19-20, 29 AD, or the 15th year of Tiberius. This seems to confirm the 2 BC date and, since John was five months older, this also confirms the autumn birth date for Jesus.

Elisabeth hid herself for five months and then the Angel Gabriel announced to Mary both Elisabeth’s condition and that Mary also would bear a son who would be called Jesus. Mary went “with haste” to visit Elisabeth, who was then in the first week of her sixth month, or the fourth week of December, 3 BC.

If Jesus was born 280 days later it would place the date of his birth on September 29, 2 BC. If Jesus was born on September 29, 2 BC, it is interesting to note that it was also the First of Tishri, the day of the Feast of Trumpets.

Written by: KOINONIA HOUSE, Founder: Chuck Missler, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 83816, USA, 2008, eNews, electronic media.

Something to think about.

5 comments

  1. Alejandra Albert · ·

    although this gospel also associates the birth with the Census of Quirinius which took place ten years later.

    Like

  2. Albert,
    As you have notice I deleted your commercial website link within the body of this as this is a form of false advertising in spam that is utilized by dishonest brokers attempting to inflate the number of followers to their website.

    This appears to be what you’ve done but in case I’m wrong let me address your statement. First of all what the spammers do is a either right totally generic statements which are not related to the article, or they cut-and-paste sentences which is what you done here.

    A Google search shows that you cut-and-paste verbatim this sentence from Wikipedia. It is a copyright infringement and a violation of integrity to do this without quoting the source.

    Then on top of that you made no statement that made any sense, you simply put up one of the arguments that those that oppose the premise of the article.

    However, allow me to address the statement. Josephus, who is credited by Christians and non-Christians alike as being an honest broker as a historian was the individual that quoted the Jews concerning when the Census of Quirinius occurred.

    Those that do not believe in the and authority and integrity of the Bible, those that believe that it is not divinely inspired but simply a book written by men, will take other books written by men and use those as the standard and when compared with the Bible say the Bible is wrong because we know the historical records of others are correct and since the Bible was written by men, the men that wrote it were wrong.

    That’s what’s been done concerning your quote. One, Luke’s account does not entitle the census, in fact Luke does not speak of the census he speaks of a taxation, though normally taxation’s and censuses were concurrent and related, but not necessarily so.

    So for one were probably speaking about apples and oranges in the comparison.

    If you use what Luke says, he says nothing at all about a census. Luke 2:1-3, states: “And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.” but even if, which I believe is probably the case that the census included the taxation, the question then becomes what year did the taxation begin in the area of Judea.

    Luke does not date this occurrence, however dating from chapter 3 verse one backwards and knowing that Jesus was around 30 years old would indicate that according to Luke the taxation part occurred somewhere around the year one or two BC.

    So as a believer I trust the Bible as my source for this information as opposed to Josephus concerning his accuracy, and further Roman historians are utilize concerning when this supposedly senses took place based upon when certain individuals were given positions of leadership within the Roman Empire, which again is subject to interpretation based upon the Gregorian dating system which took place long after these occurrences.

    Also the author that you quote goes on to state that it is due toas he states: “The calendar era Anno Domini (abbreviated as “A.D.” or “C. E.”) is based on the birth of Jesus, although the exact method used for its formation by Dionysius in the 6th century is less than certain.“.

    so now what were doing is were utilizing when a dating system started as our plum line of reality, are chronological baseline and then judging when we think this occurs in real time and comparing it against Luke.

    This is one of the most ridiculous arguments one would ever attempt to take in is not scientific in the least.

    The Gregorian calendar, created in the 1500s, plagued with errors and revisions, and the use of Anno Domini, which was used in the prior Julian calendar; before the Gregorian calendar; these are what you’re going to use as your benchmark to critique the book of Luke.

    It takes far more faith to believe the contortions that men have 1 to 2 attempt to dispute the accuracy of the Bible; because they cannot dispute the physical existence of a man named Jesus of Nazareth who did those things that we were recorded in the Bible, so they attempt to show as incorrect the content – it takes more faith to believe this than it does the Bible.

    There are so many internal proofs concerning the correct dating of the Bible time does not permit.

    Did you ever wonder why the first chapter talk so much about John the Baptist father who was a priest, Zacharias?

    The reason why is we know that the priesthood had 24 groups that served for two weeks at a time to cover a year of service in the temple. We know the group that Zacharias belong to (“the course of Abia” ~ Luke 1:5) and when he was in the temple serving when the angel appeared to him concerning the birth of his son John the Baptist. We know when his wife Elizabeth went and saw Mary and was pregnant with John the Baptist and prophesied concerning when Mary would have her child 6 Months later (Luke 1:24-27).

    The article I wrote is only in consideration of Luke chapter 3 verse 1, it is based upon a very small consideration not noting the above and many other internal evidences found with in the Gospels contained within the Bible.

    What you find when ever you do any historical research in this matter is that there are arbitrary and sometimes contradictory reasoning concerning elements which would be used to refute the biblical account, such as the sentence concerning the census that you plagiarized.

    therefore I would suggest that you read the Bible and check it out for its own validity, not based the foundation of your eternal soul upon what men have written; but do an honest evaluation if the Bible is credible, and therefore trustworthy.

    If all you want to do is try to find holes that’s all you’ll ever find, and the reality of the situation is you will have an eternity in hell to regret it.

    Albert I know these are strong words, but it takes somebody to use strong words to tell us when we have spinach in our teeth, rather than attempting to be polite and allow them to walk around looking ridiculous.

    In the same way, I had much rather have somebody throw ice water in my face concerning something so important that had affected my eternal security in either heaven or hell, then to be swayed by the niceties of the culture.

    Again I’m not attempting to be mean, I’m attempting to get you to check it out for yourself.

    Most authorities around me advise that you are a spammer out for dishonest gain and what you’ve done. That really doesn’t matter. There are no coincidences within God’s kingdom.

    I pray that you are so bugged by what I’ve said that you will check it out for yourself – and that the Holy Spirit will open your eyes to the reality of Jesus Christ and the book which God sent to us via 60 different men, yet with one author – the Bible – these are things to hang your eternal future, not making money by drawing people to your website in a dishonest manner.

    Brent

    Like

  3. […] (Shorted form the article: “The Date Jesus was Born” LINK) […]

    Like

  4. […] (Shorted form the article: “The Date Jesus was Born.” This full version is: LINK) […]

    Like

  5. […] (Shorted form the article: “The Date Jesus was Born.” This full version is: LINK) […]

    Like

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Faith Bible Ministries Blog ~ An Online Study of the Bible

“So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This online Bible study series addresses primary New Testament words in their original language - Koinè Greek - as opposed to mainly using the English translations; which is like adding color to a black-and-white picture.

Faith Video Ministries Inc.

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God"

Faith Bible Ministries

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God"

%d bloggers like this: