DATE OF THE BIRTH OF CHRIST (The Star that Astonished the World)

(Summarized from E. L. Martin, "The Star that Astonished the World," ASK Publications, Box 25000, Portland Or. 1991)

(1) The date of the birth of Christ hinges on just one thing, the statement of Josephus (Antiquities 17.6-8) that Herod died shortly after an eclipse of the moon. Astronomers supply the dates for such eclipses around those years: None in 7 or 6 BC. In 5 BC, March 23, 29 days to Passover. Also in 5 BC. Sept. 15,7 months to Passover. In 4 B.C. March 13, 29 days to Passover. 3 and 2 B.C. no eclipses. In 1 BC. January 10, 12 1/2 weeks to Passover.

(2) Josephus also tells what events happened between the Eclipse and the Passover (cf. Martin pp. 85-87).They would occupy probably about 12 weeks. Martin also, pp. 99-101 shows that the eclipse of Sept. 15,5 BC could not fit with known data, especially the fact that Herod was seriously ill in Jericho (over 800 feet below sea level) when the eclipse happened - but Jericho was a furnace of heat at that time, Sept. 15. Herod would not have stayed there when he could have had the much better climate of Jerusalem. But if the eclipse was in midwinter - Jan. 10--Herod would find Jericho comfortable.

(3) We know from an inscription from Paphlagonia in Asia Minor - cf. Lewis and Reinhold, Roman Civilization, Source Book II, pp. 34-35 - that in 3 BC all the people took an oath of allegiance to Augustus. The same oath is also reported by the Armenian historian Moses of Khorene, and by the later historian Orosius.

(4) Augustus was to receive the great title of Pater Patriae on Feb. 5, 2 BC. So the actual governor of Palestine, probably Varus, would have had to go to Rome for the festivities, and since sailing on the Mediterranean stopped about Nov. 1, and did not resume until Spring, he must have gone in the early fall of 3 BC. But Quirinius was nearby, had just finished a successful war against the Homonadenses. So he was left as acting Governor. Luke does not use the noun governor, but the participle, "governing".

(5) There is an obscure decade in history, 6 BC to 4 AD, as Classicists readily recognize. Yet this period is important, including the time when Tiberius was absent from political life at Rome, being at Capri. It is hard to fit the events of this period into place if we make the birth of Christ early as is commonly done. But if we put it in 3 BC the difficulties are over. For example, we know Augustus received his 15th acclamation for a major victory, won by one of his generals, around this time. If we pick 4 BC for the death of Herod, we cannot find a victory to warrant the acclamation, which came in 1 AD. But if we put the birth of Christ in 3 BC, then the war would be running at about the needed time, and finished in 1 AD.

Objection: a) Josephus says Herod had a reign of 37 years after being proclaimed king by Romans, and had 34 yrs. after death of Antigonus, which came soon after Herod took Jerusalem. b) Further, his 3 successors, Archelaus, Antipas and Philip started to reign in 4 BC. So Herod died in 4 BC.

Reply: a) That calculation would make death of Herod actually in 3 BC, not in 4 BC - scholars have to stretch the date to 4 BC, since no eclipse of moon happened in 3 BC. - But, Herod took Jerusalem late in 36 BC (on Yom Kippur in a sabbatical year, so well remembered - and Josephus says Pompey had taken Jerusalem in 63 which was 27 yrs. to the day of Herod's capture of Jerusalem). Using the common accession year dating, we see Herod started his 34 years on Nisan 1 in 35 BC, and those years would end on Nisan 1 BC. So 34 years after 35 BC yields 1 BC for death of Herod after eclipse of Jan. 10.--b) As to the 3 successors, Herod lost favor of Augustus in 4 BC, on a false report, was no longer "Friend of Caesar", but "Subject". Antedating of reigns was common - reason here was to make the three seem to connect with the two "royal" sons, of Hasmonean descent, Alexander and Aristobulus, whom Herod executed on false reports from Antipater (do not confuse with Antipas).

The Star: In the evening of June 17, 2 BC, there was a spectacular astronomical event in the western sky. Venus moved eastward seemingly going to collide with Jupiter. They appeared as one star, not two, dominating the twilight of the western sky in the direction of Palestine. This conjunction had not happened for centuries, would not happen again for more centuries. Jupiter was considered the Father, Venus the Mother. Ten 19 days later, on August 31st. Venus came within .36 degrees of Mercury. On Sept. 11 came the New Moon, the Jewish New Year. This happened when Jupiter, the Kin planed was approaching Regulus, the King star. Further, there were three conjunctions of Jupiter and Regulus within the constellation of Leo, the lion which was considered the head of the Zodiac. Now Gen. 49:10 had foretold there would always be a ruler from Judah, whom Jacob called the lion, until the time of the Messiah. Leo was dominated by the star Regulus, which astronomers called the King Star. The Magi, being astronomers and astrologers, would surely read these signs. (The three conjunctions with Regulus were Aug. 12, 3 BC; Feb. 17, 2 BC, and May 8/9 2 BC).

Also, on Dec. 25 of 2 B.C., Jupiter stopped for 6 days over Bethlehem. This is a normal motion for Jupiter, it stops twice, and reverses its seeming movement. This may have been the very time the Magi came with their gifts. This was also the time of the Hanukkah festival, during which it was customary for Jewish Fathers to give gifts to their children.

Martin thinks the birth of Jesus was in September 3 BC, and the probable date of the Magi was Dec. 25, 2 BC.

More than 600 planetariums here and in Europe have revised their Christmas star show to match this work of E. L. Martin.

Another look at this from the Bible:

John 3: 22-

22: ¹⁰ After this, Jesus and his disciples went into the region of Judea, where he spent some time with them baptizing.
23: John was also baptizing in Aenon near Salim, ¹¹ because there was an abundance of water there, and people came to be baptized,
24: ¹² for John had not yet been imprisoned.
25: Now a dispute arose between the disciples of John and a Jew ¹³ about ceremonial washings.
26: So they came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, the one who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you testified, here he is baptizing and everyone is coming to him."
27: John answered and said, "No one can receive anything except what has been given him from heaven.
28: You yourselves can testify that I said (that) I am not the Messiah, but that I was sent before him.
29: The one who has the bride is the bridegroom; the best man, ¹⁴ who stands and listens for him, rejoices greatly at the bridegroom's voice. So this joy of mine has been made complete.
30: He must increase; I must decrease."

And the footnotes:

¹⁰ [22-26] Jesus' ministry in Judea is only loosely connected with John 2:13-3:21; cf John 1:19-36. Perhaps John the Baptist's further testimony was transposed here to give meaning to "water" in John 3:5. Jesus is depicted as baptizing (John 3:22); contrast John 4:2.

¹¹ [23] Aenon near Salim: site uncertain, either in the upper Jordan valley or in Samaria.

¹² [24] A remark probably intended to avoid objections based on a chronology like that of the synoptics (Matthew 4:12; Mark 1:14).

¹³ [25] A Jew: some think Jesus is meant. Many manuscripts read "Jews."

¹⁴ [29] The best man: literally, "the friend of the groom," the shoshben of Jewish tradition, who arranged the wedding. Competition between him and the groom would be unthinkable.

Birth of Yeshua during Sukkot 3757

Why Didn't The Red Ribbon on the Head of the Scapegoat Turn White in 30 C.E.?

Question:

I was wondering about a story that a "Hebrew-Christian" told me recently. He said that there was a scarlet cloth which would turn white every year when the high priest atoned for the sins of the people. When Jesus died, around 30 A.D., the cloth would no longer turn white when the priest atoned for sins because Jesus was the final atonement. I've read this story in other sources, and I wondered what you have to say about it.

Answer:

This assertion with which you were confronted has, in the last decade, attracted wide interest in the evangelical world. In fact, I am somewhat surprised that it has taken this long for one of our website visitors to write in with this question.

In spite of the popularity this issue has gained in the Christian world in recent years, this contention stands out as one of the most bizarre arguments used by those who seek to convert the Jewish people to Christianity. What makes this line of reasoning so odd is that it seeks to use the Talmud to prove that Jesus is the messiah. While many readers of our website would simply be surprised to learn that missionaries would point to the Talmud to prove the validity of the Christian religion, in reality, this misuse of rabbinic literature is widespread.

Those who have navigated through the plethora of Hebrew-Christian websites are well aware of how widespread this abuse of Jewish literature has become in recent years. Moreover, by probing this surprising missionary approach, we can gain enormous insight into the schizophrenic technique that Christendom so often takes in its cherished work of Jewish evangelism.

Bear in mind, missionaries rarely shy away from an opportunity to condemn the Oral Law as the nimble work of men rather than the oral transmission handed down to us by Moses, our teacher. In fact, there are few issues that seem to produce the visceral passions of the Hebrew-Christian world as does the mere mention of the Talmud. These evangelicals fervently insist that the written Bible alone is reliable and divinely inspired and often scornfully mock traditional Jews as practicing a "rabbinic Judaism." Needless to say, Christians rarely use this acrid label in a manor that is meant to be flattering.

Paradoxically, whenever missionaries feel the urge to advance their position by quoting from the Talmud, they undergo a spontaneous conversion as they happily and unhesitatingly point to the works of the Talmud with a newfound regard for its truthfulness and inspiration. Yet the very same Talmud, which evangelicals gleefully use to advance their tenuous positions, also unambiguously states that Jesus of Nazareth was neither virtuous nor the messiah. This pick-and-choose approach that missionaries unflinchingly embrace doesn't appear to bother those dedicated to Jewish evangelism.

Nevertheless, it is essential that we examine this well-worn argument with which you were confronted. In Tractate Yoma 39b, the Talmud quotes a Baraisa that discusses numerous remarkable phenomena that occurred in the Temple during the Yom Kippur service. More specifically, the Talmud states that there was a strip of scarlet-dyed wool tied to the head of the scapegoat which would turn white in the presence of the large crowd gathered at the Temple on the Day of Atonement. The Jewish people perceived this miraculous transformation as a heavenly sign that their sins were forgiven. The Talmud relates, however, that 40 years before the destruction of the second Temple the scarlet colored strip of wool did not turn white. The text of the Talmud which missionaries quote states,

The Rabbis taught that forty years prior to the destruction of the Temple the lot did not come up in the [high priest's] right hand nor did the tongue of scarlet wool become white . . . .

Citing the above statement, missionaries contend that the year the scarlet ribbon ceased to turn white coincides with the time that Jesus was crucified. They go on to insist that 40 years prior to the destruction of the second Temple corresponds to the year 30 C.E., which is approximately the time of Jesus' crucifixion. They conclude, therefore, that the cessation of the whitening of the scarlet ribbon clearly indicates that God was no longer accepting animal sacrifices, and the Jewish people, therefore, needed to turn to Jesus as their only avenue for atonement. Ultimately, this argument asserts that reason the scarlet strip of wool did not turn white in the year 30 C.E. was due to the fact that the sins of the Jews were not forgiven because they did not accept Jesus as their messiah...

…Let us now examine the Talmudic discussion from which this quote was derived. As you will discover, this text was carefully quoted out of its original context. Once this crucial background is restored and understood, it will become clear that this quote does nothing to advance any Christian theology.

Tractate Yoma is wholly given over to laws pertaining to Yom Kippur. Although missionaries cite the above statement which appears on page 39b, the discussion leading up to this quote begins on the previous page, 39a. Quoting from a Baraisa, the Talmud begins with a discussion of the deteriorating spiritual condition of the Jewish people during the second Temple period. Throughout this fascinating discourse, the miraculous events that transpired during the Temple ceremonies are the barometer by which the Baraisa measures the religious decline of the nation of Israel during this difficult epoch in Jewish history. The period of time examined in this assessment begins with the era during which Shimon HaTzaddik officiated as the high priest until the time that the Romans destroyed the second Temple in the year 70 C.E. More specifically, the Talmud breaks this period down into three successive stages, with the first stage being the most meritorious, the second marking a gradual spiritual decline, and the third the most deleterious.

The Baraisa begins by recounting the miraculous events that repeatedly occurred during the forty years when Shimon HaTzaddik officiated as high priest. The Baraisa then continues to relate how the appearance of these miracles progressively diminished in the years that followed his death. These events are as follows:

1) The lot inscribed "LaHashem," would always appear in the right hand of the high priest during the Yom Kippur service.

2) The strip of scarlet-dyed wool which was tied to the head of the scapegoat always turned white during the Yom Kippur service.

3) The western-most lamp of the Temple menorah remained lit until the priest would use its fire to kindle the next day's lamps.

4) The pyre on the altar did not require any additional wood to sustain a strong fire.

5) There was a blessing upon the first fruits of the Omer, the two loaves offered on Shevuoth, and on the loaves of the showbread so that each priest was satisfied with a portion no larger than the size of an olive.

For More:

http://www.outreachjudaism.org/Yomkippur.html

30 C.E. correlates to the Hebrew year 3790 Back up 33 and a half (from Pesach) to arrive at Sukkot 3757. Back up 9 months and you fall into Chanukah 3756.

And: 3790 (the crucifixion) falls right in the middle of a shimita cycle. To find shimita year divide by 7. 541 x 7 = 3787 + three and a half = 3790 (Rosh HaShana 3790 + one half year is Pesach).

Daniel 9:27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering (It is finished!). And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.”

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.