When was Jesus born?

Emun said:

I am convinced that Jesus was born on the 1st of Nisan in the year 5 BC.

Why the 1st of Nisan?
Because it is exactly the same day that God's presence filled the Tent of Meeting (Exodus 40:2, Exodus 40:34). This event was a shadow that foretold the incarnation of God (John 1:14). On the same day that God came to earth to be in a tent, on the same day God came to earth to be in a human body.

What also speaks of Jesus being born in the month of Nisan, and thus in a spring, is the fact that when Jesus was born, shepherds were in the fields with their flocks. This could not have been the case in a cold month like December.

Am I now saying that celebrating Christmas in December is wrong? No, you can celebrate the birth of Jesus whenever you want. There is nothing wrong with celebrating Christmas at all.

Why in the year 5 BC?
Scripture records:

-that Jesus was baptized at the age of 30
-that Jesus' ministry began when he was baptized
-that Jesus ministry lasted 3.5 years
-that Jesus was baptized on the 15th year of Tiberius
-that Jesus was born before Herod died

History records:
-that Tiberius 15th year of his reign was 26 AD
-that Herod died 4 BC

Conclusions:
If the 15th year of Tiberius is 26 AD, then Jesus was 30 years old at that time. If Jesus was 30 years old in 26 AD, then he was born 5 BC. So the crucifixion of Jesus was 30 AD, since Jesus ministry lasted 3.5 years. And since Jesus was crucified on the 14th of Nisan, he was crucified only 13 days after his birthday, which means he was 34 years and 13 days old when he died.

Click to expand...

We will never know, not even based on the biblical data.

Matthew says that He was born during Herod's administration, and Luke says it was during Quirinius' administration when Judea became an annexed province of Syria.

Emun said:

I am convinced that Jesus was born on the 1st of Nisan in the year 5 BC.

Why the 1st of Nisan?
Because it is exactly the same day that God's presence filled the Tent of Meeting (Exodus 40:2, Exodus 40:34). This event was a shadow that foretold the incarnation of God (John 1:14). On the same day that God came to earth to be in a tent, on the same day God came to earth to be in a human body.

What also speaks of Jesus being born in the month of Nisan, and thus in a spring, is the fact that when Jesus was born, shepherds were in the fields with their flocks. This could not have been the case in a cold month like December.

Am I now saying that celebrating Christmas in December is wrong? No, you can celebrate the birth of Jesus whenever you want. There is nothing wrong with celebrating Christmas at all.

Why in the year 5 BC?
Scripture records:

-that Jesus was baptized at the age of 30
-that Jesus' ministry began when he was baptized
-that Jesus ministry lasted 3.5 years
-that Jesus was baptized on the 15th year of Tiberius
-that Jesus was born before Herod died

History records:
-that Tiberius 15th year of his reign was 26 AD
-that Herod died 4 BC

Conclusions:
If the 15th year of Tiberius is 26 AD, then Jesus was 30 years old at that time. If Jesus was 30 years old in 26 AD, then he was born 5 BC. So the crucifixion of Jesus was 30 AD, since Jesus ministry lasted 3.5 years. And since Jesus was crucified on the 14th of Nisan, he was crucified only 13 days after his birthday, which means he was 34 years and 13 days old when he died.

Click to expand...

Jesus was Born -Tishri 1 which coincides with our September 11, 3BC, between 6:18 - 7:39 pm, Palestine time.

This date has been verified by several as the actual date …



short vid
September 11th, 3BC, Is The Actual Date That Jesus Christ Was Born 10-9-2021

Article
SEPTEMBER 11--THE TRUE DATE OF JESUS' BIRTH? | Intercessors for America

Emun said:

It's actually pretty easy to figure it out.

And what is the problem?

Click to expand...

The timelines doesn't match.

Emun said:

It has been proposed that Quirinius was governor of Syria on two separate occasions, once while prosecuting the military action against the Homonadensians between 12 and 2 b.c., and later beginning about a.d. 6. A Latin inscription discovered in 1764 has been interpreted to refer to Quirinius as having served as governor of Syria on two occasions.

Click to expand...

Could you link me to the reference that supports this?

Some suggest that Quirinius might have served two terms as governor of Syria and conducted two censuses in Judea, but the career of Quirinius and the names and dates of the governors are well documented and there is no time before 6 AD when he could have served as governor of Syria. Also, there was only one ever recorded census issued by Quirinius, which Josephus recounts as the time Judas of Galilee started a rebellion against it. We find this one and only census to match the one discussed in Acts 5:37.

Justin Martyr (c. 100 - c. 165), in "The First Apology" (highlighted link to direct quote), also said this,

"Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registers of the taxing made under Quirinius, your first procurator in Judea."
- Chapter XXXIV. —Place of Christ’s birth foretold

Click to expand...

It is up to you to see how much historical value are in his words, nonetheless. We will never know when our Lord was born, but we can assume it was around that time frame.

Emun said:

Herod the Great died 4 BC; how could Jesus have been born 3 BC?

Click to expand...

I am aware of the discrepancy of Herod’s reign some (like yourself) have it at 4 BCE and others claim it to be 1 BCE

I won’t pretend to say I know ….I don’t. But I will check my notes and get back with you.

I have the research notes from the date I provided of Jesus’s birth. If I remember correctly it has to do with the celestial configuration, astronomy is not my forte, that was other members line of expertise.

First off, Tiberius’ 15th year of reign, by Jewish reckoning (which is the correct reckoning given the author and his typically Jewish colloquial turns of phrase and expectations of understanding), is 28 CE. By a Roman reckoning, which would include an accession year, his 15th year would be 29 CE. There is absolutely no precedent to reckon his 15th year to 26 CE. Hypotheses of a joint reign with Augustus beginning two years earlier than the normal reckoning of Tiberius’ reign are not supported with any known evidence. At best, Tiberius enjoyed joint imperium with Augustus for the purpose of the 14 CE census, but this was not a joint reign. It merely imparted to Tiberius the authority to carry out said census. Tiberius himself rejected the succession upon Augustus’ death (albeit to give the appearance of humility more so than out of any lack of desire for the power). Nor do we have so much as a single epigraphic, numismatic, or literary example of his reign being reckoned from any Roman year other than 15 CE. Although, again, the reckoning should be Jewish, given Luke’s Jewish colloquialisms. A king’s reign by Jewish reckoning begins from the moment of accession, and he is counted a full year of completed reign each 1st of Nisan. With 14 CE as his point of accession, his 15th year began on Nisan 1 of 28 CE.

That this reckoning is correct can be demonstrated at the first Passover mentioned in John, where the priests declare that the temple had been forty-six years in the building. The temple of Herod was begun in his 18th year of reign, and completed after a year and six months, giving us a completion in 18 BCE. Forty-six years, inclusively from 18 BCE, equates to 28 CE, whereas Jesus was at the Passover at the very beginning of the new Jewish ecclesiastical year in 29 CE. So as they say, the temple had been built for forty-six years, and was now in its forty-seventh year of existence.

By extension, if Jesus was thirty years old in the 15th year of Tiberius, he would have been born in 3 BCE. When in 3 BCE is debatable. But I myself would suggest June. Luke says that Gabrielle visited Mary in the “sixth month.” While this is often conflated with Elizabeth’s sixth month of pregnancy rather than the sixth month of the year, I am of the opinion that the two are separate statements that coincide. It was the sixth month of the Jewish year, which was also the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, meaning that Elizabeth conceived in the month of Nisan. Given the variation between the Jewish lunar calendar, the solar Julian calendar, sabbatical year interference, intercalary months, etc., Mary’s forty-week gestation would have concluded in the vicinity of late May to early July, allowing for variables in when she conceived, whether she carried to full term or was early, etc. As an average, I suggest some time in June.

As for Herod ... that requires a thread all its own. A reign of 37 and 34 years from 40 BCE and 37 BCE respectively, counting his reign in the standard Jewish manner of reckoning the reigns of kings, and then ending on the 7th of Kislev, puts his death in December of 3 BCE. I am certain that he did not die in 4 BCE. I am equally certain that he did not die in 1 BCE. Barring the eclipse, which I believe is the cause of the confusion with Herod, the literary evidence demonstrates that he most likely died as stated, in December of 3 BCE. I suspect that the eclipse is either spurious or misunderstood.

Lastly, we don’t have any real evidence that his ministry was three years, three and a half years, etc. All we can say for certain is that three Passover’s are mentioned. The first, after his baptism, should be recognized as being the year following Tiberius’ 15th year of reign. The Passover would have already been past if you account for Jesus’ 40 days in the wilderness, which clearly took place in John’s gospel prior to the first two disciples following him. With three Passover’s mentioned, he couldn’t have died prior to 33 CE, relative to the astronomical data.

So from the year of his baptism, that gives us a window of five full years, plus half a month, and his ministry proper didn’t begin right away. At the wedding in Cana, he stated that it was not yet his time. Speculatively speaking, it seems that his ministry proper didn’t begin until after the arrest of John the Baptist. For all we know, it lasted barely over a year.

Those are my thoughts. It looks to me like you are just now starting down this rabbit hole. It’s a fun journey of research. Best of luck.

Emun said:

From Wikipedia: "Thus, according to Suetonius, these ceremonies and the declaration of his "co-Princeps" took place in the year 12 AD, after Tiberius' return from Germania." Tiberius - Wikipedia

Since Tiberius' co-reign began in 12 AD, his 15th year would accordingly be 26 AD.

It is consensus among historians that Herod died 4 BC. Only a few disagree. Moreover, most scholars also agree that Jesus was crucified in 30 AD. These are scholars who know history better than we do.

From Wikipedia: "Rainer Riesner stating that "the fourteenth of Nisan (7 April) of the year A.D. 30 is, apparently in the opinion of the majority of contemporary scholars as well, far and away the most likely date of the crucifixion of Jesus." Crucifixion of Jesus - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

It’s important to note, firstly, that Wikipedia articles can be written by anyone, you and me included. Suetonius does not state that Tiberius and Augustus had a joint reign. Dio shows that he was given certain authority, but that was in 13 CE, not 12 CE, and it wasn’t a joint reign.

Dio Cass. 56.28.1-3 “When Lucius Munatius and Gaius Silius had been installed as consuls, Augustus with seeming reluctance accepted a fifth ten-year term as head of the State. He again gave Tiberius the tribunician power, and permitted Drusus, the latter's son, to stand for the consulship two years later without ever having held the praetorship. He also asked for twenty annual counsellors because of his age, which did not permit him to go to the senate-house any longer except on rare occasions; previously, it seems, he had associated with himself fifteen advisers for six months at a time. It was also voted that any measure should be valid, as being satisfactory to the whole senate, which should be resolved upon by him in deliberation with Tiberius and with these counsellors, as well as the consuls of the year and the consuls designate, together with his grandchildren (the adopted ones, I mean) and such others as he might at any time call on for advice.” — 13 BCE

You are mistaken in concluding that it is a consensus among historians that he died in 30 CE. Some hold to 30 CE, others to 33 CE.

Furthermore, this topic has been the subject of my own intensive research for almost twenty-five years. I am a scholar, and an expert in this subject matter. I didn’t read a Wikipedia article and determine myself to be an expert. I have read, studied, and researched hundreds of books on the direct subject matter and dozens of related topics. While I realize that this is a web forum where everyone thinks they know everything, I really do know what I’m talking about.

Emun said:

Just because Josephus doesn't report an earlier census doesn't mean it didn't take place. The "massacre of the innocents" in Bethlehem is also not documented anywhere and it still took place.

Click to expand...

Let me ask you this:

If the Lord Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Matthew, then why did His parents have to travel there to register for the census in Luke? In Matthew, before returning from Egypt, being afraid to return to Judea because of Archelaus, they decided to live in Nazareth. But why, if they were from there to begin with in Luke and was only in Judea for a census? The more you look at the two accounts, they are different.

Emun said:

Most historians agree that Herod died in 4 BC.

From John P. Meier's famous Historical Jesus series, A Marginal Jew:

The attempts by a few historians to prove that Herod the Great died in some other year [than 4 BC] have not met with general acceptance. For example, W. E. Filmer (“The Chronology of the Reign of Herod the Great,” JTS 17 [1966] 283–98) uses contorted arguments in an attempt to establish that Herod died instead in 1 B.C. As Timothy D. Barnes points out very well (“The Date of Herod’s Death”, JTS 19 [1968] 204–9), Filmer’s thesis collides with two major pieces of evidence: (1) Herod’s successors all reckoned their reigns as beginning in 5–4 B.C. (2) The synchronisms with events datable in the wider context of the history of the Roman Empire—synchronisms made possible by Josephus’ narrative of the circumstances attending Herod’s death—make 1 B.C. almost impossible to sustain. Barnes goes on to suggest that perhaps December of 5 B.C. may be a better candidate for the date of Herod’s death than March/April of 4 B.C. As is the case with other alternatives, this innovation has not met with general approval.

The question of Herod’s death is taken up once more in a number of essays in the Chronos, Kairos, Christos volume edited by Verdaman [sic] and Yamauchi. Ernest L. Martin (“The Nativity and Herod’s Death,” 85–92) revives the theory that Herod died in 1 B.C., with Jesus’ birth placed in 3 or 2 B.C. This does not receive support from the other contributors to the volume who address the same issue. Douglas Johnson (“‘And They Went Eight Stades Towards Herodeion,’” 93–99) defends the traditional date of 4 B.C. for Herod’s death, pointing out that Martin has mistranslated a key text concerning Herod’s funeral in Ant. 17.8.3 §199. Harold W. Hoehner (“The Date of the Death of Herod the Great,” 101–11) likewise champions 4 B.C. Paul L. Maier (“The Date of the Nativity and the Chronology of Jesus’ Life,” 113–30) adds still another voice in favor of 4 B.C.... All in all, the scattered attempts to undermine 4 B.C. as the year of Herod’s death must be pronounced a failure.

Click to expand...

Just tossing in the following: Josephus records the moon "turned to blood" the night Herod the Great executed Matthias, and "soon after" he died. Of course, "turned to blood" means a total lunar eclipse, and that lends itself to some dates. Candidates for that lunar eclipse have to have been visible in Jerusalem and been total eclipses.

That brings us to this Lunar Eclipse page from NASA: Catalog of Lunar Eclipses: -0099 to 0000 . There's a strong candidate for October 6, 2 BC. There was a penumbral eclipse on February 19, 4 BC, but the shadow didn't cover the disc of the moon, and others visible from Jerusalem that year covered the moon less, and might not have been noticed at all. Even the February 19th eclipse might not have been noticed. The next best candidate might be January 29, 6 BC.

I'm not arguing for any particular date, here, only providing the link to the NASA page for discussion. The date of the lunar eclipse noted by Josephus only establishes the date of the execution of Matthias. Still up in the air is the year of Herod the Great's death. I will ask this: If Matthias was executed on January 28, 6 BC, isn't 4 BC a little distant to be consider happening close to Herod's death?

Jonaitis said:

Let me ask you this:

If the Lord Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Matthew, then why did His parents have to travel there to register for the census in Luke? In Matthew, before returning from Egypt, being afraid to return to Judea because of Archelaus, they decided to live in Nazareth. But why, if they were from there to begin with in Luke and was only in Judea for a census? The more you look at the two accounts, they are different.

Click to expand...

I don't follow. They went to Bethlehem, and from the accounts were staying at a house there when the Wise Men appeared. We can speculate how long they lived in Bethlehem from the ages in Herod the Great's order. They went from Bethlehem to Egypt, where there was a Jewish community, beyond the reach of Herod the Great. After Herod the Great died, they returned, but when they heard who ruled in Herod the Great's place, they went to Nazareth, which was then beyond his reach. Others should correct me on this point: I think that was during the Herodian Tetrarchy. That was established after the death of Herod the Great, and Nazareth was then in the hands of another ruler.

Tuur said:

Just tossing in the following: Josephus records the moon "turned to blood" the night Herod the Great executed Matthias, and "soon after" he died. Of course, "turned to blood" means a total lunar eclipse, and that lends itself to some dates. Candidates for that lunar eclipse have to have been visible in Jerusalem and been total eclipses.

That brings us to this Lunar Eclipse page from NASA: Catalog of Lunar Eclipses: -0099 to 0000 . There's a strong candidate for October 6, 2 BC. There was a penumbral eclipse on February 19, 4 BC, but the shadow didn't cover the disc of the moon, and others visible from Jerusalem that year covered the moon less, and might not have been noticed at all. Even the February 19th eclipse might not have been noticed. The next best candidate might be January 29, 6 BC.

I'm not arguing for any particular date, here, only providing the link to the NASA page for discussion. The date of the lunar eclipse noted by Josephus only establishes the date of the execution of Matthias. Still up in the air is the year of Herod the Great's death. I will ask this: If Matthias was executed on January 28, 6 BC, isn't 4 BC a little distant to be consider happening close to Herod's death?

Click to expand...

Josephus does not say the moon turned to blood. I don’t know where you got that, but it is inaccurate.

Would it be accurate to say we don't know for sure b/c the Jews didn't really celebrate birthdays?

Jesus was born December 25th in the year 0000 AD.