Free Republic

Ahhh yes. Me and my faith are accused of supporting “antichrists” because we don’t agreee with a rather tenous case for Christ’s birth being linked to the Feast of Tabernacles
...and I am accused of being huffy.

LOL

Fair enough.

Merry Christmas, folks

It’s December 25th...in case you were wondering.

‘’The world will weep and moan when they receive the revelation that their religious pagan holidays were a tribute to the spirit of the anti-christ...the one against Christ or the counterfeit Christ. We are so buried in our deception it is scary.’’

that is hatespeak....especially when injected into a very non-confrontational discussion of Christ’s birth date.

spin all you want, it’s hatespeak

no...you are the one that needs to chill.

Please re-post ANYTHING I have stated as an ad-hom.

Wrong. The date of Herod’s death is NOT established as 4-6 BC and I provided proof. Please come down off your high horse. Herod died in 1 BC according to one of the foremost Scripture Scholars.

Perhaps you need to learn to read. I provided FAR more than Church doctrine. In fact, I provided Biblical support and Historical support as well.

To then use it as a launching pad for ad-hominem nonsense, such as yours is beyond the pale. Why don’t you try countering the information provided?

Oh wait...we know why.

nevermind....

Just makes me crazy. I try to get into a meaningful discussion about the birthdate of Christ and some want to use it as nothing more than an assault on Catholicism...
just incredible

So, your position is borne, not so much out of legitimate Scriptural study as of blind, irrational hatred of Catholicism.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Please don’t comment on my threads any more....

It is really not my interpretation.....it is the Greek language. That is why it is proper to render [John 1:14] And the Word was made flesh, and tabernacled among us. and yet,no Bible translation that I am aware of has rendered it that way...only you The winter months in Israel are similar to what we experience in the central valley of California. Very cold nights....sometimes below freezing with some snow flurries during December and January. September....on the other hand can still be very mild at night....definitely pleasant during daylight hours. To bring your pregnant wife, on the back of a donkey, many miles encompassing more than just a few days .....would not be considered harsh....necessarily during the Fall Festivals. So, Mary traveling ON FOOT, ALONE, INTO THE MOUNTAINS to visit Elizabeth is more plausible to you? As far as being historical fact.....Pope Liberius in 354 A.D. was the first Pontiff to recognize any day at all....and December 25th had been selected. The first "Christ-Mass" was celebrated by Pope Sixtus in 435 A.D. and coincided with the existing Roman celebration of Mithras. This was done in an attempt to divert the populace from the popular pagan feasts already instituted throughout the Church/State Empire. For the first three hundred odd years from the resurrection there were no celebrations of Our Lord's birthday. Absoultely absurd! December 25th was almost UNIVERSALLY celebrated as the birth at least 227 years prior to that, under Bishop Telesphorus. Further, a nearly unbroken line of celebration of December 25th can be seen from that point, with the Apostolic Constitution declaring it in the 3rd Century. What there is No evidence of...ZERO...is any mention of the Feast of Tabernacles coinciding with the birth. Even Josephus stated that it coincided with December 25th by tying it to the Solstice which fell on that EXACT day! The evidence for December 25th is overwhelming. In fact, it's basically airtight. For the first three hundred years after the resurrection nothing is mentioned about the Birthday of Our Lord. And, of course....in addition to early history being silent about it.....the Apostles did not recognize or celebrate the nativity as well according to scripture. Simply and demonstrably false, as I have already demonstrated My calculations and figures regarding the death of Herod from post #92 are correct.....and The Lord was born during the last few months of Herod's life No, your calculations of Herod's death are impossible, missing both the eclipse of 4BC and the one of 1 BC as well as the Census under Quirinnius. 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". So, even if Christ were born during the Feast of Tabernacles, 3 BC would be the earliest possible. All of the evidence...all of it....Scripture, the Star, the early church...all of it points to December 25th, 2 BC, with Herod's death occuring in January 1 BC. Your info regarding Christ's death actually would fit better, making him 32 at the time of His death rather than 35 under your scenario. As for His birth, it's a closed issue for me. December 25th, 2 BC. All other dates are simply impossible.

well...since it was wrong the first time, the word ‘’again’’ doesn’t apply.

Also, isn’t it true that Herod did not begin construction of the second temple in 19 BC but rather, destroyed the first temple then. I have read that it was 8 years of aquiring material, so that Construction would have commenced circa 11 BC and the 46 years (45 years by our calender) would take us to circa 34 AD?

I dispute your contention that the birth could not have occured “around Christmas time”. All of the data EMPHATICALLY places the birth in late December. Your case for the year is at least compelling but your case for a September birth is very weak....basically consisting of your interpretaion of John 1:14.

Given the climate, September is simply impossible. In my view, that Jesus was born on December 25th is an issue of verified historical fact.

The year is something more fluid...

more for you to consider...

(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.

.....the December 25th, 2BC date actually fits very well to almost all criteria...but I’ll keep looking into this.

please give your thoughts on this objection by foremost scripture scholar Fr William Most;

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.

Your case is quite compelling. Your info regarding the year of His birth and death actually seem to be correct. However, I am fairly certain He was born in late December and not the fall, as you suggest.

I’d like to see your evidence to the contrary.

You have provided a tremendous amont of info here, for which I am grateful. Please allow me sufficient time to absorb it.