Birth of Jesus
From Wikinfo
Although the western calendar uses the Birth of Christ as its primary reference point it is almost certain that Jesus was not born at the start of what might be termed the Christian Era. In AD 525 Pope John I commissioned Dionysius Exiguus to determine a suitable feast day for Christ's birth. In so doing, Dionysius also attempted to determine the year of His birth, but his calculations were inaccurate. Dionysius determined the year of Christ's birth to be 753 years after the founding of Rome, but this cannot be correct if evidence from the gospels and other sources is taken into account. Dionysius' estimate is several years later than the supposed true date. Nevertheless, his date was adopted as the basis for the modern calendar.
An accurate chronology of the life of Jesus is not possible due to numerous uncertainties in the timing of key events. However, the gospels of Matthew and Luke, although conflicting in some detail, do give accounts of the birth and early life of Jesus; the gospels of Mark and John say nothing of these. Many scholars have tried to determine the year of Christ's birth by making assumptions based on related events whose dates have been determined with varying degrees of accuracy. Others have tried to work backwards from the death of Christ. This is thought to have occurred in either AD 32 or AD 33.
The life and death of King Herod gives us some indication as to Christ's birth. Matthew (1.18) and Luke (1.5) tell us that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great as King of Judea. Herod was king from 40 BC to 4 BC (his rule actually commenced in 37 BC). The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (AD 37 - AD 105) wrote a reasonably detailed account of Herod's life, including a date for his death. This is stated as April, 4 BC. Some time before his death, Herod had ordered that all males under the age of two in Bethlehem be killed. This was to protect his supposed royal lineage from the new 'King of the Jews'. This order had been provoked by a meeting with the Magi (wise men), who had informed Herod of their quest for '...the one who has been born King of the Jews'. With this order in mind it can be assumed that, given a reasonably accurate date for Herod's death, Jesus was born around 5 BC or 6 BC. Shortly after His birth Mary and Joseph took Jesus to Egypt to escape Herod's death squads. They returned only after Herod had died.
A second pointer to the date of Jesus' birth is the Roman census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria (Luke 2.2). The census required that everyone should return to their own town to register. So Joseph and Mary travelled from Nazareth to Joseph's home town of Bethlehem. Luke (2.5) states that Mary was with child at this time. At issue is precisely when Quirinius was governor, and when the census took place. It is known that Quirinius was the Imperial Legate of Syria-Cicilia from AD 6 to AD 9 and that during this time - probably in AD 6 - a taxation census took place in Israel. But this is far beyond the commonly accepted period for Christ's birth. Two explanations are offered for this discrepancy (Greetham 1996): It is stated in secular sources that Saturnius was governor of Syria between 8 BC and 6 BC. Possibly a scripture copier inadvertently replaced the name of Saturnius with that of Quirinius. He might have done so because he confused the taxation census of AD 6 with one that took place in 6 BC. If this error was made, then all subsequent copies would also be in error. A second possibility is that Quirinius was indeed governor of Syria around 6 BC and that he became governor again in AD 6. In The Acts of the Apostles (Acts 5:37) Luke speaks of a census which caused a revolt. This would tie in with the unpopular taxation census of AD 6. Luke does not, however, link this census with his 'first census' which was the reason for Mary and Joseph to return to Bethlehem. A further clue is given by Dio Cassius, a Roman, who writes of taxes being levied during the decade of 10 BC onwards. The levying of these taxes required people to return to their home town so that an assessment of their inheritance could be made.
The evidence given here seems to indicate some time around 6 BC as the period of Jesus' birth. However, there is much conflicting testimony from a variety of sources, and some of this points to a time around 2 BC. Tertullian, a theologian and writer of Christian antiquity who lived from about AD 155 to AD 220, states that the Roman emperor Augustus began his rule 41 years before the birth of Jesus and this continued until his death, some 15 years after the birth of Jesus. Since Augustus is known to have died in AD 14 (19th August), Jesus' birth is put at around 2 BC. Tertullian also states that Jesus was born 28 years after the death of Cleopatra. Cleopatra died in 30 BC, and this again put Jesus' birth in, or around, 2 BC. Others such as Iraneus (AD 130 - AD 200), a second century Christian leader, and Eusebius (AD 260 - AD 340), the Bishop of C�sarea and "Father of Church History" also relate Augustus' reign to Christ's birth and again a date of 2 BC is suggested. Luke (3.23) links the age of Jesus to the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberius; 'At the fifteenth year of Tiberius as emperor of Rome Jesus was about thirty years old'. Tiberius became emperor in AD14 so Luke's statement also suggests a date of around 2 BC. Unfortunately Luke is not accurate in his estimation of Jesus' age when he gives it as "about thirty". This might have been referring to the minimum age for holding priestly office. Some scholars suggest that Jesus could have been anything up to 34 years old at this time - which would put the date of His birth at 6 BC.
Much of the evidence concerning the year of Jesus' birth points to 6 BC, but there is a significant amount of material now available which indicates 2 BC. Further evidence may come to light as archaeological research continues. All that can be said for the moment is that His birth probably took place some time between 6 BC and 2 BC, and it almost certainly didn't take place in AD 1. AD 2000 is now generally accepted to be several years too late for celebrating the 2000th anniversary of Christ's birth, which passed un-noticed at some time during the mid to late 1990s.
What of the actual date of His birth: 25th December has been celebrated as Christ's birthday since the early middle ages, but there is a great deal of evidence, historical and biblical, which indicates this date to be incorrect. During the first 200 years of Christianity there is no mention of a celebration of Christ's birth. This might well be because Christian tradition did not include the celebration of birth. Indeed, it is not until comparatively recent times that birthdays have been celebrated by Christianity. In AD 243 the feast calendar known as 'De Pascha Computus' gives the date of Christ's birth as 28th March. Other dates have been suggested in various sources, and the Eastern church chose 6th January as their date. Not until AD 354 is any reference made to 25th December. This is given in the Calendar of Philocalus, a Roman document, which gives the birth of Jesus as Friday, 25th December AD 1. It is thought that the date of 25th December was chosen by the early church to oppose the pagan feast of Sol, the Sun god, which was also held on 25th December - a time close to the winter solstice. In this way the church could persuade the pagan masses to accept the new faith.
Possibly the most significant indicator against 25th December is the presence of the shepherds in the fields tending their sheep at the time of Christ's birth. Luke's gospel (2:8) states 'And there were shepherds living out in the fields near by, keeping watch over their flocks at night'. It was customary for shepherds to keep their flocks in the fields at night, except when the weather was cold, as would be the case in December. When the weather was too cold the sheep would be kept under shelter. Israeli meteorologists have studied weather patterns in Israel over long periods of time and have extrapolated back 2000 years. They found that weather conditions then were not much different from those of today, where the average temperature in Bethlehem during December is 44�F (7�C). This confirms that the cold months from November through to March would be when the shepherds kept their sheep under shelter. A recent theory suggests that the sheep in the fields may have been those that were destined for temple sacrifice. These lambs would be kept outside even in December. However, if this was the case, Luke did not explain it in his gospel, and given his attention to detail elsewhere, most scholars are of the opinion that he would have noted these exceptional circumstances.
Luke (2:1-7) also noted the taking of the Roman census as the reason for Mary and Joseph returning to Bethlehem:
'In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.) And everyone went to his own town to register./ So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.'
It is unlikely that the Roman rulers would have subjected the population to the difficulties of travelling in mid-winter. Censuses would normally take place after the harvest in September or October and the census referred to by Luke is unlikely to have been an exception.
One apparently indisputable fact about Jesus' birth is that it occurred six months after the birth of John the Baptist - Jesus' cousin. So when was John the Baptist born? Unfortunately, no definite date is available, but there appear to be two possibilities for the time of year of his birth. Again, Luke (1:35-37) is helpful in setting the scene:
'The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who is said to be barren is in her sixth month. For nothing is impossible with God."'
Elizabeth was the mother of John the Baptist and the Bible says that she conceived shortly after her husband, the priest Zacharias, had completed serving his course at the Temple. Zacharias was a priest of the order of Abijah and the priests served according to a known cycle and order. Each course ran for seven days from Sabbath to Sabbath and there were 24 courses in each cycle and two cycles per year. The first cycle began around March or April, with the second one commencing six months later in September or October. The division of Abijah was the eighth to serve and this would occur during the 10th week of the year in the first cycle and the 35th week during the second cycle. According to Luke, the annunciation of Mary took place six months after this time, and the birth of Jesus would be nine months later. There is no indication in the bible as to which cycle Zacharias had just served when Elizabeth conceived. So we have the birth of John the Baptist taking place in either March or September, and the birth of Jesus in either September or the following March. A further uncertainty is introduced when considering the description by Luke (1:26-28) of the Annunciation. Luke states 'On the sixth month God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth... '. Is this 'sixth month' the sixth month of Elizabeth's confinement or the sixth month of the year? The original Greek writings of Luke can be interpreted in either way; the latter interpretation would give a date for Jesus' birth in December, bearing in mind we are talking here about the Jewish year.
There is as much uncertainty about the date of Christ's birth as there is about the year of His birth. Events based on the time at which Zacharias was serving in the Temple would seem to provide the strongest indications, but they are by no means conclusive. The mystery will remain, until such time as new archaeological evidence comes to light - if it ever does.
