|
When was Jesus born?
In spite of the carol which sings of 'in the bleak mid-Winter' and in spite of any hard evidence regarding the time of Jesus birth it is highly unlikely that He was born in December.
first published 19/12/2010
With the schedule for temple duty fixed in Scripture, Zechariah – in the line of Abijah (Luke 1:5) and allocated the 8th 2-week period of the Jewish year at the end of Tammuz (1 Chron 24:10) – would have been on temple duty around the end of June/beginning of July. (Nisan is the first month in the Jewish calendar.)
It was then that he received divine revelation concerning his wife Elizabeth becoming pregnant (Luke 1:11-13). Six months into that pregnancy (Luke 1:36) Mary was similarly shown that she was to 'be with child' (Luke 1:31).
It is therefore quite probable that Jesus was born in the Autum rather than at the end of the year.
In fact the shepherds wouldn't have been 'in their fields at night' in mid-Winter, nor would Caesar have been likely to have called a census which involved mass travel at that time of year.
'Mouse-over' for the following Scripture references: 1 Chron. 24:10; Luke 1:5; Luke 1:11-13; Luke 1:31; Luke 1:36; Luke 2:7
|
Christians Together, 01/10/2013
|
(page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8)
| |
|
Jeanette Stewart (Guest) |
20/12/2010 17:23 |
Being a former Jehovah's Witness, I have taken great pains to study this matter to see if what Christianity in general preaches to be true. I am a 100%, bible-believing, born again Christian, and will be for eternity, by His unfailing grace, but I still maintain that Jesus was not born in December, and totally agree with the above article.
On saying that, the important issue for me is not *when* Jesus was born, but *that* He was born. If the whole world decides to celebrate His coming to humanity in December, then I shall, along with them, rejoice that my Saviour came into this world to save us from our sins. And if the powers that be move the celebration to Autumn, then I shall continue to rejoice in His coming amongst us. I am certain that He, of all people, understands that as humans, we sometimes get it wrong :)
Thank you for posting this article.
|
| |
|
Paul Whitworth |
20/12/2010 18:02 |
For me Christmas doesn't really come into it. The importance of Christs birth lies in its reflection of the situation of things at His return. His first coming in many ways points to His second coming.
The signs in the sky. The census, numbering of people for economic control of the Roman empire. Herod and the attempt to stop Christs birth. John being born in the spirit of Elijah. Jews in the land and in Jerusalem, and many false teachers.
There are many other things but Christs birth is prophetic more than historic. We should not so much be looking back but forward. These are great and exciting times we live in. Come Lord Jesus, come!
|
| |
|
Paul Whitworth |
20/12/2010 18:09 |
Also it is important to note that the exact date of His first coming is not specificly known, nor will His second, but those who seek Him will clearly see the day drawing near.
|
| |
|
David Haslam (Guest) |
20/12/2010 18:17 |
http://doig.net/NT_Chronology.htm
comes to a different conclusion, and is based on more sources than the above link seems to rely on.
Moreover, why does the article make Herod the one who decreed the census? Luke plainly informs us that it was "a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be enrolled", with no mention of Herod whatsoever!
Oops! Well spotted. Corrected. Ed
|
| |
|
David Haslam (Guest) |
20/12/2010 18:24 |
Your opening states, "it is highly unlikely that He was born in December".
I suspect this statement is itself not based on firm evidence, but rather due to the unthinking rejection of December based on the all too often repeated allegation that Dec 25 was chosen merely by the Church of Rome because it happened to be close to the Winter Solstice.
I'm not a Roman Catholic, yet the surprising thing is that Pope Liberius' determination of the date of Christ's birth might well turn out to have been historically correct.
Therefore, it no longer 'phases me out' that the Western churches celebrate His Birth on 25 December.
|
| |
|
Paul Whitworth |
20/12/2010 19:49 |
David, you said,
'I suspect this statement is itself not based on firm evidence, but rather due to the unthinking rejection of December based on the all too often repeated allegation that Dec 25 was chosen merely by the Church of Rome because it happened to be close to the Winter Solstice.'
Again I would say that it is a side issue as no one knows for sure. And understanding his birth is not really about knowing when to celebrate Christmas.
|
| |
|
Martin Lisemore |
20/12/2010 21:32 |
Try looking at the Feast of Tabernacles as Christ's birth. Thereafter look at the fulfilment of the Feasts.
Each Feast in the calendar of Israel is a prophetic utterance in itself. It's exact date, according to a lunar calendar, is vitally important.
Paul, we can know for certain Jesus birth date. If He fulfilled in His lifetime more than three hundred historic prophecies as given in the Old Testament, logic says He fulfilled this one too. Why not? Why must we exclude this one?
Paul, for once I must disagree with you. It does matter when He came. The one prophecy neglected, conveniently or otherwise by various churches, is the primary fulfilment of the Feasts, particularly Tabernacles. Succoth, for our Messianic Jewish brothers and sisters.
The moment we shift away from the Biblical definitions, shift away from true prophecy, we put power in the hands of men. Thus we have Christmas in December, when it was actually, in my limited understanding, at the Feast of Tabernacles in that year. It is, after all a moveable Feast according to the cycles of the moon.
There is no Feast of Israel given in the Scripture (excluding Hannuka which is not Scriptural) which does not have a prophetic significance, if we would but search for it.
The churches have lighted upon Pesach, and called it Easter. The precise day of the crucifixion is still in dispute, and in fact, was the issue which divided the church of Rome from the church of Constantinople. Yet if Jesus fulfilled prophecy, He was, is, the sacrificial Lamb of Exodus fulfilled in reality on Calvary.
We have lighted upon the Feast of Weeks, and called it Pentecost, or Whitsun, until an illustrious UK Prime Minister did away with that and called it Spring Bank Holiday. For a clue to his identity, he converted to Rome when out of office and has recently published his memoirs.
We have invented a winter Christmas complete with trees, snow, shepherds minding sheep,cribs and tinsel and decorations etc.
When the churches begin to recover their Jewish heritage, not Roots movement, then it will prosper. When it preaches a whole gospel as once delivered it will succeed. When it becomes a New Testament Church, rooted firmly in it's Jewish heritage it will be the Bride.
Until then, just watch this space, because Jesus will make of the Bride what He wants, not what we think He should have of us. We are the love gift He will deliver to His Father, the result of His obedience even unto death on the cross.
Hah! I'd better shut up here. I get heated about this. But as I said in an earlier post, I will enjoy, and sing along with, Carols from Kings College, despite my voice. The hooks we place in our young people endure; that's why I will be singing with Kings College choir, with some joy in my heart.
|
| |
|
Paul Whitworth |
20/12/2010 22:05 |
Martin I'm not sure what you mean. Is it because I overlook December 25th as the actual birth date?
|
(page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8)
|
|
|
|
