Misplaced Pages

Date of the birth of Jesus

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
(Redirected from Birthdate of Jesus) Nativity of Jesus of Nazareth
Some of this article's listed sources may not be reliable. Please help improve this article by looking for better, more reliable sources. Unreliable citations may be challenged and removed. (December 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Birth of Jesus
Nativity by Robert Campin (c. 1420), depicting the birth of Jesus during Spring
Part of a series on
Jesus
Jesus in Christianity
Jesus in Islam
Background
Jesus in history
Perspectives on Jesus
Jesus in culture

The date of the birth of Jesus is not stated in the gospels or in any historical sources and the evidence is too incomplete to allow for consistent dating. However, most biblical scholars and ancient historians believe that his birth date is around 6 to 4 BC. Two main approaches have been used to estimate the year of the birth of Jesus: one based on the accounts in the Gospels of his birth with reference to King Herod's reign, and the other by subtracting his stated age of "about 30 years" when he began preaching.

Aside from the historiographical approach of anchoring the possible year to certain independently well-documented events mentioned in Matthew and Luke, other techniques used by believers to identify the year of the birth of Jesus have included working backward from the estimation of the start of the ministry of Jesus and assuming that the accounts of astrological portents in the gospels can be associated with certain astronomical alignments or other phenomena.

The day or season has been estimated by various methods, including the description of shepherds watching over their sheep. In the third century, the precise date of Jesus's birth was a subject of great interest, with early Christian writers suggesting various dates in March, April and May.

Steven Hijmans of the University of Alberta writes that "cosmic symbolism" inspired the Church leadership in Rome to choose 25 December, the Roman date of the winter solstice and the birthday of Sol Invictus ('Invincible Sun'), as the birthday of Christ.

Year of birth

Nativity accounts

The nativity accounts in the New Testament gospels of Matthew and Luke do not mention a date or time of year for the birth of Jesus. Karl Rahner states that the authors of the gospels generally focused on theological elements rather than historical chronologies.

Both Luke and Matthew associate Jesus' birth with the time of Herod the Great. Matthew 2:1 states that "Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king". He also implies that Jesus could have been as much as two years old at the time of the visit of the Magi, because Herod ordered the murder of all boys up to the age of two years (Massacre of the Innocents), "in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi" Matthew 2:16. In addition, if the phrase "about 30" in Luke 3:23 is interpreted to mean 32 years old, this could fit a date of birth just within the reign of Herod, who died in 4 BC according to most scholars.

Luke 1:5 mentions the reign of Herod shortly before the birth of Jesus. This Herod died in 4 BC. Luke 2:1-2 also places the birth during a census decreed by Caesar Augustus, when Quirinius was governing Judah. Some interpreters of Luke determine that this was the Census of Quirinius, which the Jewish historian Josephus described as taking place c. AD 6 in his book Antiquities of the Jews (written c. AD 93), by indicating that Cyrenius/Quirinius began to be the governor of Syria in AD 6 and a census took place during his tenure sometime between AD 6–7. Since Herod died a decade before this census, most scholars generally accept a date of birth between 6 and 4 BC. On the other hand, a census was not a unique event in the Roman Empire. For example, Tertullian argued that a number of censuses were performed throughout the Roman world under Sentius Saturninus at the same time. Some biblical scholars and commentators believe the two accounts can be harmonized, arguing that the text in Luke can be read as "registration before (πρώτη) Quirinius was governor of Syria", i.e., that Luke was actually referring to a completely different census, though this understanding of the Greek word has been rejected by scholars.

Backdating from the beginning of the ministry of Jesus

Dispute of Jesus and the Pharisees, by James Tissot, c. 1890

Another approach to estimating the year of birth is based on an attempt to work backwards from the point when Jesus began preaching, using the statement in Luke 3:23 that he was "about 30 years of age" at that time. Jesus began to preach after being baptized by John the Baptist, and based on Luke's gospel John only began baptizing people in "the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar" (Luke 3:1–2), which scholars estimate would place the year at about AD 28–29. By working backwards from this, it would appear that Jesus was probably born no later than 1 BC. Another theory is that Herod's death was as late as after the January eclipse of 1 BC or even AD 1 after the eclipse that occurred in 1 December BC.

Luke's date is independently confirmed by John's reference in John 2:20 to the Temple being in its 46th year of construction when Jesus began his ministry during Passover, which corresponds to around 27–29 AD according to scholarly estimates.

Dates based on the Star of Bethlehem

Most scholars regard the Star of Bethlehem account to be a pious fiction, of literary and theological value, rather than historical. Nonetheless, attempts have been made to interpret it as an astronomical event, which might then help date Jesus' birth through the use of ancient astronomical records, or modern astronomical calculations. The first such attempt was made by Johannes Kepler who interpreted the account to describe a great conjunction. Other astronomical events have been considered, including a close planetary conjunction between Venus and Jupiter in 2 BC.

Date of Herod's death

Most scholars concerning the date of Herod's death follow Emil Schürer's calculations published in 1896, which revised a traditional death date of 1 BC to 4 BC. Two of Herod's sons, Archelaus and Philip the Tetrarch, dated their rule from 4 BC, though Archelaus apparently held royal authority during Herod's lifetime. Philip's reign would last for 37 years, until his death in the traditionally accepted 20th year of Tiberius (AD 34), which implies his accession as 4 BC.

In 1998, David Beyer published that the oldest Latin manuscripts of Josephus’s Antiquities have the death of Philip in the 22nd year of Tiberius (and not the 20th year, as shown in later editions of the Antiquities). In the British Library, there is not a single manuscript prior to AD 1544 that has the traditionally accepted 20th year of Tiberius for the death of Philip. This evidence removes the main obstacle for a later date of 1 BC for the death of Herod. Beyer's arguments have been questioned by Raymond Jachowski, who argued that Beyer only used ill-attested Latin translations instead of the original Greek manuscripts, some of which date to the 13th and 11 centuries. Nevertheless, other scholars support the traditional date of 1 BC for Herod's death, and argue that his heirs backdated their reigns to 4 or 3 BC to assert an overlapping with Herod's rule and bolster their own legitimacy, something that had already been done by a few rulers before them.

According to Dionysius Exiguus: the Anno Domini system

The Anno Domini dating system was devised in 525 by Dionysius Exiguus to enumerate the years in his Easter table. His system was to replace the Diocletian era that had been used in older Easter tables, as he did not wish to continue the memory of a tyrant who persecuted Christians. The last year of the old table, Diocletian Anno Martyrium 247, was immediately followed by the first year of his table, Anno Domini 532. When Dionysius devised his table, Julian calendar years were identified by naming the consuls who held office that year — Dionysius himself stated that the "present year" was "the consulship of Probus Junior", which was 525 years "since the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ". Thus, Dionysius implied that Jesus' incarnation occurred 525 years earlier, without stating the specific year during which his birth or conception occurred. "However, nowhere in his exposition of his table does Dionysius relate his epoch to any other dating system, whether consulate, Olympiad, year of the world, or regnal year of Augustus; much less does he explain or justify the underlying date."

Bonnie J. Blackburn and Leofranc Holford-Strevens briefly present arguments for 2 BC, 1 BC, or AD 1 as the year Dionysius intended for the Nativity or Incarnation. Among the sources of confusion are:

  • In modern times, Incarnation is synonymous with the conception, but some ancient writers, such as Bede, considered incarnation to be synonymous with the Nativity.
  • The civil or consular year began on 1 January, but the Diocletian year began on 29 August (30 August in the year before a Julian leap year).
  • There were inaccuracies in the lists of consuls.
  • There were confused summations of emperors' regnal years.

It is not known how Dionysius established the year of Jesus's birth. One major theory is that Dionysius based his calculation on the Gospel of Luke, which states that Jesus was "about thirty years old" shortly after "the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar" (AD 28/29), and hence subtracted thirty years from that date, or that Dionysius counted back 532 years from the first year of his new table. This method was probably the one used by ancient historians such as Tertullian, Eusebius or Epiphanius, all of whom agree that Jesus was born in 2 BC, probably following this statement of Jesus' age (i.e. subtracting thirty years to AD 29). Alternatively, Dionysius may have used an earlier unknown source. The Chronograph of 354 states that Jesus was born during the consulship of Caesar and Paullus (AD 1), but the logic behind this is also unknown.

It has been speculated by Georges Declercq that Dionysius' desire to replace Diocletian years with a calendar based on the incarnation of Jesus was intended to prevent people from believing the imminent end of the world. At the time, it was believed by some that the resurrection of the dead and end of the world would occur 500 years after the birth of Jesus. The old Anno Mundi calendar theoretically commenced with the creation of the world based on information in the Old Testament. It was believed that, based on the Anno Mundi calendar, Jesus was born in the year 5500 (5500 years after the world was created) with the year 6000 of the Anno Mundi calendar marking the end of the world. Anno Mundi 6000 (approximately AD 500) was thus equated with the end of the world but this date had already passed in the time of Dionysius. The "Historia Brittonum" attributed to Nennius written in the 9th century makes extensive use of the Anno Passionis (AP) dating system which was in common use as well as the newer AD dating system. The AP dating system took its start from 'The Year of The Passion'. It is generally accepted by experts there is a 27-year difference between AP and AD reference.

Pope Benedict XVI states that Dionysius Exiguus committed an error.

According to Jewish sources

Similarities between the Yeshu mentioned in some rabbinic literature and the Christian Jesus have led some researchers to speculate that the former is a reference to the latter. (See for example Jesus in the Talmud.) This opinion is disputed however, as Yeshu also can mean "may his name and memory be blotted out", probably used as a damnatio memoriae to censor certain names. It is claimed in the Talmud that Yeshu was born during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus, who ruled from 103 BC to 76 BC. Furthermore, Sanhedrin 107b and Sotah 47a mention Yeshu taking refuge in Egypt during Alexander's persecution of Pharisees (88-76 BC). Therefore, it can be assumed the Yeshu of the Talmud was born after 103 BC but before 88 BC. Hagigah 2:2 also depicts Yeshu similarly, while also claiming that Yeshu became an apostate during his refuge in Egypt.

The Talmudic claim that Yeshu was born c. 103 – 88 BC is also repeated in the Toledot Yeshu, an 11th-century Jewish text, which implies that this belief was held by at least some Jews at that time. Baring-Gould (page 71) points out that the Wagenseil version of the Toledot Yeshu incorrectly names the Queen as Helene and describes her as the widow of Alexander Jannaeus who died in 76 BC. (her name was in fact Salome Alexandra, and she died in 67 BC). The Yeshu of the Toledot Yeshu clearly refers to Jesus of Nazareth, and there is no possibility that he is another person named Yeshu because the tract was specifically written as a response to the claims of the canonical gospels. It circulated widely in Europe and the Middle East during the Middle Ages as a Jewish response to the Christian account. A 15th-century Yemenite version of the text is titled Maaseh Yeshu, or the "Episode of Jesus"—in which Jesus is described as being the son of either Joseph or Pandera—repeats the same claim about the date when Yeshu lived. However, scholarly consensus generally sees the Toledot Yeshu as an unreliable source for the historical Jesus.

Day of birth

In the third century, the precise date of Jesus's birth became a subject of great interest, with early Christian writers suggesting various dates. Around AD 200, Clement of Alexandria wrote:

There are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord's birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the 28th year of Augustus, and in the 25th day of Pachon  ... Further, others say that He was born on the 24th or 25th of Pharmuthi .

Choice of 25 December

There are two main hypotheses as to the choice of 25 December.

Various factors contributed to the choice of 25 December as Jesus's birthday, although theology professor Susan Roll wrote in 1995: "No liturgical historian ... goes so far as to deny that it has any sort of relation with the sun, the winter solstice and the popularity of solar worship in the later Roman Empire". 25 December was the date of the winter solstice in the Roman calendar. The Calendar of Antiochus of Athens, c. 2nd century AD, marks 25 December as the "birthday of the Sun". The following century, from AD 274, the Roman festival Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of Sol Invictus, the 'Invincible Sun') was held on 25 December.

The earliest evidence of Jesus's birth being marked on 25 December is the Chronograph of 354, also called the Calendar of Filocalus. Liturgical historians generally agree that this part of the text was written in Rome in AD 336. A passage in one version of Commentary on the Prophet Daniel, originally written around AD 204 by Hippolytus of Rome, identifies 25 December as Jesus's birth date, but this passage is considered a much later interpolation.

Later in the fourth century, some Christian writers acknowledged that Christmas coincided with the winter solstice, and saw the lengthening days after the winter solstice as symbolizing the Light of Christ entering the world. In a late fourth-century sermon, Saint Augustine said:

He was born on the day which is the shortest in our earthly reckoning and from which subsequent days begin to increase in length. He, therefore, who bent low and lifted us up chose the shortest day, yet the one whence light begins to increase.

The Christian treatise De solstitiis et aequinoctiis conceptionis et nativitatis Domini Nostri Iesu Christi et Iohannis Baptistae ('On the solstice and equinox conception and birth of Our Lord Jesus Christ and John the Baptist'), from the second half of the fourth century, is the earliest known text dating John's birth to the summer solstice and Jesus's birth to the winter solstice. The author says that the lengthening days after midwinter and shortening days after midsummer reflects John's remark that "He must increase, but I must decrease" (John 3:30). Steven Hijmans of the University of Alberta concludes: "It is cosmic symbolism ... which inspired the Church leadership in Rome" to choose the winter solstice as the birthday of Jesus and the summer solstice as that of John, "supplemented by the equinoxes as their respective dates of conception".

25 December was also nine months after 25 March, a date chosen as Jesus's conception (the Annunciation) and the date of the spring equinox on the Roman calendar.

History of religions hypothesis

A mosaic dated to around 300 AD in the Tomb of the Julii, an apparently Christian tomb in the Vatican Necropolis. Most scholars believe it depicts Jesus as the sun god Sol / Helios.

Based on this winter solstice link, the "History of Religions hypothesis" or "Substitution theory" proposes the Church chose 25 December as the birthday of Jesus (dies Natalis Christi) to appropriate the Roman festival of the birthday of the Invincible Sun (dies Natalis Solis Invicti), held on the same date. It honored the sun god Sol Invictus, and some scholars hold that it was instituted by the emperor Aurelian in AD 274. In Rome, this yearly festival was celebrated with thirty chariot races. Christmas thus emerged during "the peak of state-supported sun worship" in the Empire, where most Christians lived. As noted above, the earliest evidence for Christ's birth being marked on 25 December dates from sixty years after Aurelian.

In AD 362, the emperor Julian wrote in his Hymn to King Helios that the Agon Solis (sacred contest for Sol) was a festival of the sun, instituted by emperor Aurelian, held at the end of the Saturnalia in late December. Gary Forsythe, Professor of Ancient History, says: "This celebration would have formed a welcome addition to the seven-day period of the Saturnalia (December 17–23), Rome's most joyous holiday season since Republican times, characterized by parties, banquets, and exchanges of gifts". Around AD 200, Tertullian had berated Christians for taking part in, and even adopting, the pagan Saturnalia festival.

At the time when Christmas emerged, some Christian writers likened Jesus to the Sun and referred to him as the 'Sun of Righteousness' (Sol Justitiae) prophesied by Malachi.

The Christian treatise De solstitiis et aequinoctiis, from the late fourth century AD, associates Jesus's birth with the "birthday of the sun" and Sol Invictus:

Our Lord, too, is born in the month of December ... the eighth before the calends of January ... But they call it the 'birthday of the invincible one' (Invictus). But who then is as invincible as our Lord who defeated the death he suffered? Or if they say that this is the birthday of the sun, well He Himself is the Sun of Justice.

Early in the fifth century, Maximus of Turin said in a Christmas sermon:

People frequently call this day of the Lord's birth 'the new sun' ... even the Jews and pagans agree to the name. This should willingly be accepted by us, since with the rising of the Savior there is salvation not only for the human race, but even the brilliance of the sun itself is renewed.

In a mid fifth century Christmas sermon, Pope Leo I admonishes Christians who bow their heads to the Sun as they enter Old St. Peter's Basilica. In another Christmas sermon, he rebukes those "who hold the pernicious belief that our celebration today seems to derive ... from, as they say, the rising of the 'new sun'." Susan Roll writes that "this testimony to the deep-rootedness and continued popularity of the civil sun-cult" has been put forward as evidence of the Substitution theory.

The theory is mentioned in an annotation of uncertain date added to a manuscript by 12th-century Syrian bishop Jacob Bar-Salibi. The scribe wrote:

It was a custom of the Pagans to celebrate on the same 25 December the birthday of the Sun, at which they kindled lights in token of festivity. In these solemnities and revelries, the Christians also took part. Accordingly, when the doctors of the Church perceived that the Christians had a leaning to this festival, they took counsel and resolved that the true Nativity should be solemnised on that day.

In the 17th century, Isaac Newton, who was coincidentally born on 25 December, suggested the date of Christmas was chosen to correspond with the winter solstice. In 1743, German scholar Paul Ernst Jablonski argued the date was chosen to correspond with the Natalis Solis Invicti. The hypothesis was first developed substantially by Hermann Usener, a fellow German scholar, in 1889 and adopted by many scholars thereafter.

Steven Hijmans of the University of Alberta says that in recent years "a fair number of scholars" have abandoned the idea that the date was chosen to appropriate the pagan festival. He agrees that the Church chose the date because it was the winter solstice, but he argues that "While they were aware that pagans called this day the 'birthday' of Sol Invictus, this did not concern them and it did not play any role in their choice of date for Christmas". Hijmans says: "while the winter solstice on or around December 25 was well established in the Roman imperial calendar, there is no evidence that a religious celebration of Sol on that day antedated the celebration of Christmas". Thomas Talley argues that Aurelian instituted the Dies Natalis Solis Invicti partly to give a pagan significance to a date he argues was already important for Christians. According to C. Philipp E. Nothaft, a professor at Trinity College Dublin, though the history of religions hypothesis "is nowadays used as the default explanation for the choice of 25 December as Christ's birthday, few advocates of this theory seem to be aware of how paltry the available evidence actually is."

Calculation hypothesis

Further information: Chronology of Jesus
The 'calculation hypothesis' was proposed by Louis Duchesne, a priest and historian of Christianity.

The "Calculation hypothesis", suggests that 25 December was chosen because it was nine months after a date chosen as Jesus's conception (the Annunciation): 25 March, the Roman date of the spring equinox. The hypothesis was first proposed by French priest and historian Louis Duchesne in 1889. The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought remarks that the "calculations hypothesis potentially establishes 25 December as a Christian festival before Aurelian's decree".

In AD 221, Sextus Julius Africanus suggested 25 March, the traditional spring equinox, as the day of creation and of Jesus's conception; the Christian Church came to celebrate as the Feast of the Annunciation. While this implies a birth in December and possibly on the 25th, Africanus did not offer a birth date for Jesus, and was not an influential writer at the time. Thomas C. Schmidt argues that Hippolytus of Rome dated the birth of Jesus on 25 December. According to Schimdt, Hippolytus in his Canon placed the conception of Jesus during the feast of Passover. Since Hippolytus also wrote in his Chronicon that Jesus was born exactly nine months after the anniversary of the world’s creation (which he also believed to have ocurred during a Passover and on 25 March), this would imply that in Hippolytus' thought Jesus was born on 25 December.

Some early Christians marked Jesus's crucifixion on a date they deemed equivalent to the 14th of Nisan, the day before Passover in the Hebrew calendar. This feast was referred to as the Quartodeciman (Latin for 'fourteenth'). Some early Christian writers equated the 14th of Nisan with the equinox on 25 March, and made the date of his conception or birth the same as that of his death. Duchesne conjectured that Jesus was thought to have been born and died on the same day, so lived a whole number of years, "since symbolic number systems do not permit the imperfection of fractions". However, he admitted that this theory is not supported by any early Christian text.

Adam C. English, professor of religion at Campbell University, has argued for the veracity of 25 December as Jesus's date of birth. The Gospel of Luke says that John the Baptist's conception was foretold to Zechariah when he was serving as a priest at the Temple in Jerusalem. It further says that Jesus's conception was announced when John's mother was sixth months pregnant. English suggests that John was conceived on Yom Kippur, and dates this to the autumn equinox the year before Jesus's birth. He thus dates Jesus's conception to the following spring equinox and concludes that Jesus was born on 25 December. According to Normand Bonneau, earlier Christians also conjectured this.

Susan Roll says the calculation hypothesis is historically the minority opinion on the origin of Christmas, but was "taught in graduate liturgy programs as a thoroughly viable hypothesis". Critics of the theory, such as Bernard Botte, believe that the calculations are merely attempts by early Christians to retroactively justify the winter solstice date. Hieronymus Engberding, a supporter of the theory, also conceded that the calculations were most likely devised after the fact, to justify a date already established and to highlight "God's interlocking plan". Susan Roll questions whether "ordinary Christians in the third and fourth centuries much interested in calculations with symbolic numbers in fantasy-combinations". Likewise, Gerard Rouwhorst believes it is unlikely that feasts emerged purely "on the basis of calculations by exegetes and theologians", arguing "For a feast to take root in a community more is needed than a sophisticated computation".

Season of birth

The Angel Appearing to the Shepherds, Govert Flinck, 1639. The presence of the shepherds is important in determining the date of Jesus's birth.

Despite the modern celebration of Christmas in December, neither the Gospel of Luke nor Gospel of Matthew mention a season for Jesus' birth. Scholarly arguments have been made regarding whether shepherds would have been grazing their flock during the winter, with some scholars challenging a winter birth for Jesus, and some defending the idea by citing the mildness of winters in Judea and rabbinic rules regarding sheep near Bethlehem before February, not January.

Islamic view

The Qur'an, which is the source of Islamic tradition tells the story of Mary and the birth of Jesus (known in Islam as 'Īsā: Messenger of God) most prominently in Chapter 19. According to verse 19:25, during labor Mary was told to shake a palm tree so that ripe dates would fall off. This description, combined with the ripening period of dates places the birth of Jesus somewhere between June and October, with later times being more likely due to dates falling off easily. In the hadith compilation Tuhaf al-Uqul, the sixth imam, Jafar As Sadiq says the following when approached about the birth of Jesus during Christmas: "They have lied. Rather, it was in the middle of June. The day and night become even in the middle of March". The “middle of June” that does not necessarily refer to the fifteenth of June but it is in reference to a day near the summer equinox. As Sadiq mentions the spring equinox, which takes place near the middle of March, to make a point about the equal length of the day and night, and consequently points out, by antithesis, that of summer.

See also

References

Notes

  1. Rahner 1975, p. 731 states that the gospels do not, in general, provide enough details of dates to satisfy the demands of modern historians. Most mainline scholars do not see the Luke and Matthew nativity stories as historically factual; Marcus Borg in Borg & Wright 2009, p. 179 states "I (and most mainline scholars) do not see these stories as historically factual." Funk & Jesus Seminar 1998, p. 499 state, "There is very little in the two infancy narratives that reflects historical reminiscence." For this reason, they do not consider them a reliable method for determining Jesus' date of birth. See also Sanders 1993, pp. 85–88
  2. Josephus 1854, Book 18, Chapters 1–2 indicates that the census under Cyrenius (another form of the name "Quirinius") occurred in the 37th year after Octavian's (i.e., Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus') victory over Marcus Antonius at the Battle of Actium, which secular historical records date to 2 September 31 BC. Therefore 31 BC + 37 years which is AD 6–7. Most scholars therefore believe Luke made an error when referring to the census.(Archer 1982, p. 366)
  3. Brown 1978, p. 17 notes that "most critical scholars acknowledge a confusion and misdating on Luke's part". See for example, Dunn 2003, p. 344 Similarly, Gruen 1996, p. 157, Vermes 2006, p. 96, Davies & Sanders 1984, Brown 1977, p. 554, Harvey 2004, p. 221, Meier 1991, p. 213, Millar 1990, pp. 355–381 and A. N. Sherwin-White, pp. 166, 167.
  4. In the words of Vermes 2006, pp. 28–30 these arguments have been rejected by the mainstream as "exegetical acrobatics", springing from the assumption that the Bible is inerrant,(Novak 2001, pp. 296–297) and most scholars have concluded that Luke's account is an error.(Brown 1978, p. 17)
  5. According to Van Voorst, "It may contain a few older traditions from ancient Jewish polemics against Christians, but we learn nothing new or significant from it". However, Jane Schaberg contends that the Toledot lends weight to the theory that Mary conceived Jesus as the result of being raped.

Citations

  1. Doggett 2006, p. 579.
  2. ^ Dunn 2003, p. 344.
  3. D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo & Leon Morris. (1992). An Introduction to the New Testament, 54, 56. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.
  4. Grant, Michael (1977). Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels. Scribner's. p. 71.
  5. Ben Witherington III, "Primary Sources," Christian History 17 (1998) No. 3:12–20.
  6. ^ Rahner 1975, p. 731.
  7. "Jesus - Jewish Palestine, Messiah, Nazareth | Britannica". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 6 January 2024.
  8. ^ Maier 1989, pp. 113–129.
  9. Molnar 1999, p. 104.
  10. ^ Niswonger 1992, p. 121–124.
  11. ^ Hijmans, S.E., Sol: The Sun in the Art and Religions of Rome, 2009, p. 584.
  12. ^ Hijmans 2024, p. 1027.
  13. Freed 2001, p. 119.
  14. Barnes 1968, pp. 204–209.
  15. Bernegger 1983, pp. 526–531.
  16. Gelb 2013, p. 140.
  17. Martin 1989, pp. 93–94.
  18. Schürer, Vermès & Millar 1973, p. 328.
  19. Steinmann 2009, pp. 1–29.
  20. ^ Kokkinos 1989, pp. 133–165.
  21. ^ Evans 1973, pp. 24–39.
  22. Rhees 2007, Section 54.
  23. Archer 1982, p. 366.
  24. Bruce 1984, pp. 87–88.
  25. ^ Köstenberger, Kellum & Quarles 2009, p. 114.
  26. Freedman & Myers 2000, p. 249.
  27. Evans 2003, pp. 67–69.
  28. ^ Novak 2001, pp. 302–303.
  29. Hoehner 1977, pp. 29–37.
  30. Revillo, Juan; Keyser, John. "Did Herod the 'Great' Really Die in 4 BC?". Hope of Israel Ministries.
  31. "Where Was Jesus Born?". Koinonia House.
  32. Pratt, John. "Yet Another Eclipse for Herod". International Planetarium Society.
  33. Scarola 1998, pp. 61–81.
  34. "Kepler, De Vero Jesu Christi, Mediatoris Nostri, Natali Anno, in Astronomi Opera Omnia, vol. 4, 178."
  35. Mosley, J. (1981). "Common Errors in 'Star of Bethlehem' Planetarium Shows". The Planetarian (Third Quarter).
  36. Schürer, Emil. A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, 5 vols. New York, Scribner's, 1896.
  37. ^ Marshall, Taylor. The Eternal City (Dallas: St. John, 2012), pp. 35–65.
  38. ^ Steinmann, Andrew. From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology (St. Louis: Concordia, 2011), pp. 235–238.
  39. Barnes, Timothy David. "The Date of Herod's Death," Journal of Theological Studies ns 19 (1968), 204–219
  40. Bernegger, P. M. "Affirmation of Herod's Death in 4 B.C.", Journal of Theological Studies ns 34 (1983), 526–531.
  41. Josephus, Wars, 1.631–632.
  42. Josephus, Wars, 2.26.
  43. Hoehner, Harold. Herod Antipas, (Zondervan, 1980) p. 251.
  44. ^ Beyer, David (1998). "Josephus Reexamined: Unraveling the Twenty-Second Year of Tiberius". In Vardaman, Jerry (ed.). Chronos, Kairos, Christos II: Chronological, Nativity, and Religious Studies in Memory of Ray Summers. Mercer University Press. pp. 85–96. ISBN 978-0-86554-582-3.
  45. Jachowski, Raymond J. (2015). "The Death of Herod the Great and the Latin Josephus: Re-Examining the Twenty-Second Year of Tiberius". Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism. 11: 9–18.
  46. Edwards, Ormond. "Herodian Chronology", Palestine Exploration Quarterly 114 (1982) 29–42
  47. Keresztes, Paul. Imperial Rome and the Christians: From Herod the Great to About 200 AD (Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1989), pp.1–43.
  48. Vardaman, Jerry; Yamauchi, Edwin M., eds. (1989). "The Nativity and Herod's Death". Chronos, Kairos, Christos: Nativity and Chronological Studies Presented to Jack Finegan: 85–92.
  49. Finegan, Jack. Handbook of Biblical Chronology, Rev. ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998) 300, §516.
  50. Filmer, W. E. "Chronology of the Reign of Herod the Great", Journal of Theological Studies ns 17 (1966), 283–298.
  51. Blackburn & Holford-Strevens 2003, p. 767.
  52. Nineteen year cycle of Dionysius Introduction and First Argumentum.
  53. Blackburn & Holford-Strevens 2003, p. 778.
  54. Blackburn & Holford-Strevens 2003, pp. 778–79.
  55. Teres, Gustav (October 1984). "Time computations and Dionysius Exiguus". Journal for the History of Astronomy. 15 (3): 177–88. Bibcode:1984JHA....15..177T. doi:10.1177/002182868401500302. S2CID 117094612.
  56. Tøndering, Claus, The Calendar FAQ: Counting years Archived 24 September 2021 at the Wayback Machine
  57. ^ Mosshammer, Alden A (2009). The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era. Oxford University Press. pp. 319–56. ISBN 978-0191562365.
  58. Finegan, Jack (2015). The Handbook of Biblical Chronology. Hendrickson Publishers. p. 345. ISBN 978-1-61970-641-5.
  59. Declercq, Georges(2000). "Anno Domini. The Origins of the Christian Era" Turnhout, Belgium,
  60. Wallraff, Martin: Julius Africanus und die Christliche Weltchronik. Walter de Gruyter, 2006
  61. Mosshammer, Alden A. (2009). The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era. Oxford University Press, pp. 254, 270, 328
  62. Declercq, Georges (2000). Anno Domini. The Origins of the Christian Era. Turnhout Belgium.
  63. Halsall, Guy (2013). Worlds of Arthur: Facts & Fictions of The Dark Ages. Oxford University Press, pp 194 - 200
  64. Pollak, Sorcha (22 November 2012). "Pope Benedict Disputes Jesus' Date of Birth". Time. Retrieved 9 August 2023.
  65. Pope Benedict XVI (2012). Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 61–62. ISBN 978-1-4081-9454-6. Retrieved 9 August 2023. is therefore to be placed a few years earlier
  66. Ilan, Tal (2002). Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity Part I: Palestine 330 BCE–200 CE (Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 91). Tübingen, Germany: J.C.B. Mohr. p. 129.
  67. Stern, David (1992). Jewish New Testament Commentary. Clarksville, Maryland: Jewish New Testament Publications. pp. 4–5.
  68. Howard, George, Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, Mercer University Press, 1998. Howard cites Krauss, Das Leben Jesu, p 68
  69. "Mishnah Chagigah 2:2". www.sefaria.org. Retrieved 20 February 2024. Passages in Sanhedrin 107b and Sotah 47a refer to an individual named Yeshu in this event, stating this happened during their period of refuge in Egypt during the persecutions of Pharisees 88–76 BCE ordered by Alexander Jannæus. The incident is also mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud in Chagigah 2:2 in more detail but there the person in question is not given any name.
  70. In 1903, G.R.S. Mead, a well known theosophist, published Did Jesus Live 100 BC?, which treated the Toledot Yeshu as sufficiently authentic and reliable to postulate, on the basis of its mention of historic figures such as Queen Helene, that Jesus actually lived a century earlier than commonly believed.
  71. Mead, George R.S., Did Jesus Live 100 BC? (1903, London, Theosophical Publ'g Society) 440 pages, the Toledoth text (primarily from Strassburg ms) on pages 258-280; https://archive.org/details/didjesuslive100b00meaduoft.
  72. Van Voorst, Robert E. (2000). Jesus outside the New Testament. p. 124. ISBN 978-0-8028-4368-5. This is likely an inference from the Talmud and other Jewish usage, where Jesus is called Yeshu, and other Jews with the same name are called by the fuller name Yehoshua, "Joshua"
  73. Schäfer, Peter (2002). Mirror of His Beauty: Feminine Images of God from the Bible to the Early Kabbalah. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. p. 211f. ISBN 0-691-09068-8.
  74. "Story of Jesus (Maaseh Yeshu)". "At this saying, he was very much distraught and went and told the matter to Shimon, the son of Shetaḥ." It should be noted here that this Shimon would have been a very old man at the time when Jesus' mother conceived of him. For he served as President and Judge of the court at Jerusalem under the Hasmonaean king, Alexander Janneus, in the year 67 BCE, as also in subsequent years. He is a well-known personage in Jewish sources.
  75. See Van Voorst, op. cit.
  76. McGowan, Andrew, How December 25 Became Christmas Archived 14 December 2012 at the Wayback Machine, Bible History Daily, 12 February 2016.
  77. ^ Bradshaw, Paul (2020). "The Dating of Christmas". In Larsen, Timothy (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Christmas. Oxford University Press. pp. 7–10.
  78. English, Adam C. (14 October 2016). Christmas: Theological Anticipations. Wipf and Stock Publishers. pp. 70–71. ISBN 978-1-4982-3933-2.
  79. ^ Talley 1991, pp. 88–91.
  80. Roll, Susan K. Toward the Origins of Christmas. Peeters Publishers, 1995, p.9
  81. Roll, p.107
  82. Beck, Roger (2006). The Religion of the Mithras Cult in the Roman Empire: Mysteries of the Unconquered Sun. Oxford University Press. pp. 209–210, 254.
  83. The manuscript reads, VIII kal. Ian. natus Christus in Betleem Iudeae. ("The Chronography of 354 AD. Part 12: Commemorations of the Martyrs Archived November 22, 2011, at the Wayback Machine", The Tertullian Project. 2006.)
  84. "Christmas and its cycle". New Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 3 (2nd ed.). Catholic University of America Press. 2002. pp. 550–557.
  85. Hyden, Marc (20 December 2021). "Merry Christmas, Saturnalia or festival of Sol Invictus?". Newnan Times-Herald. Archived from the original on 26 December 2022. Retrieved 17 February 2023. Around 274 ADᵃ, Emperor Aurelian set December 25—the winter solstice at the time—for the celebration of Sol Invictus who was the 'Unconquered Sun' god. 'A marginal note on a manuscript of the writings of the Syriac biblical commentator Dionysius bar-Salibi states that in ancient times the Christmas holiday was actually shifted from 6 January to 25 December so that it fell on the same date as the pagan Sol Invictus holiday,' reads an excerpt from Biblical Archaeology. / Could early Christians have chosen 25 December to coincide with this holiday? 'The first celebration of Christmas observed by the Roman church in the West is presumed to date to ,' per the Encyclopedia Romanaᵃ, long after Aurelian established Sol Invictus' festival.
    (a) "Sol Invictus and Christmas". Encyclopaedia Romana.
  86. St Augustune, Sermon 192, in St Augustine: Sermons on the Liturgical Seasons, translated by Sr Mary Sarah Muldowney. Catholic University of America Press, 1984, p.34
  87. Augustine, Sermon 192 Archived November 25, 2016, at the Wayback Machine.
  88. Senn, Frank C. (2012). Introduction to Christian Liturgy. Fortress Press. ISBN 978-1-4514-2433-1. Archived from the original on 31 December 2015. Retrieved 23 December 2014.
  89. Roll, Susan K. (1995). Towards the Origin of Christmas. Kok Pharos Publishing. p. 87, cf. note 173. ISBN 978-90-390-0531-6. Archived from the original on 9 April 2021. Retrieved 9 April 2021.
  90. Bradshaw, Paul (2020). "The Dating of Christmas". In Larsen, Timothy (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Christmas. Oxford University Press. pp. 7–10.
  91. Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press, 2005, ISBN 978-0-19-280290-3), article "Christmas".
  92. Nothaft, C. Philipp (2014). Medieval Latin Christian Texts on the Jewish Calendar. Brill. p. 187.
  93. Melton, J. Gordon (2011). Religious Celebrations: An Encyclopedia of Holidays, Festivals, Solemn Observances, and Spiritual Commemorations : An Encyclopedia of Holidays, Festivals, Solemn Observances, and Spiritual Commemorations. ABC-CLIO. p. 39. ISBN 978-1-59884-206-7. The March 25 date, which tied together the beginning of Mary's pregnancy and the incarnation of God in Jesus as occurring nine months before Christmas (December 25), supplied the rationale for setting the beginning of the ecclesiastical and legal year. ... Both the Anglicans and the Lutherans have continued to observe the March 25 date for celebrating the Annunciation.
  94. Hijmans (2009), p.570: "To explain the presence of Sol in a Christian mausoleum, scholars suggested that in this case he was not Sol, but Christ depicted in the guise of Sol as the New Light and the Sun of Justice. In the words of Lawrence: 'This is the Sun God, Sol Invictus, but also Christ the light of the world' ... Sol in mausoleum M has become the image of choice to illustrate the gradual ascendency of Christianity in the third century AD and in particular of its appropriation of Roman imagery for Christian purposes. ... While Perler, Wallraff, and others differ on details of the meaning of this Sol-Christ, all agree on the basic Christian interpretation and the identity of Sol as Christ".
  95. Jensen, Robin Margaret (2000). Understanding Early Christian Art. Routledge. p. 42.
  96. Johnson, Maxwell (2016). Between Memory and Hope: Readings on the Liturgical Year. Liturgical Press. pp. 289–290.
  97. Kelly, p.80
  98. Bradshaw, Paul F., "Christmas" Archived 9 January 2017 at the Wayback Machine, The New SCM Dictionary of Liturgy of Worship, Hymns Ancient and Modern Ltd., 2002.
  99. ^ Forsythe, Gary (2012). Time in Roman Religion: One Thousand Years of Religious History. Routledge. p. 141.
  100. Roll, p.108
  101. Elm, Susanna (2012). Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church. University of California Press. p. 287.
  102. Remijsen, Sofie (2015). The End of Greek Athletics in Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press. p. 133.
  103. Graf, Fritz (2015). Roman Festivals in the Greek East: From the Early Empire to the Middle Byzantine Era. Cambridge University Press. pp. 77, 152.
  104. Malachi 4:2.
  105. Hijmans, Steven, "Sol Invictus, the winter solstice, and the origins of Christmas", in: Mouseion III (2003), pp.379-380
  106. Martindale, Cyril Charles (1908). "Christmas". The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 3. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
  107. Roll, pp.160-161
  108. Roll (1995), pp.152–154
  109. Cited in Christianity and Paganism in the Fourth to Eighth Centuries, Ramsay MacMullen. Yale:1997, p. 155.
  110. Newton, Isaac, Observations on the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John Archived 18 September 2012 at the Wayback Machine (1733). Ch. XI. A sun connection is possible because Christians considered Jesus to be the "Sun of righteousness" prophesied in Malachi 4:2: "But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall."
  111. Roll, Susan K. (1995). Toward the Origins of Christmas. Peeters Publishers. p. 130. ISBN 978-90-390-0531-6. Archived from the original on 2 November 2015. Retrieved 20 June 2015.
  112. ^ Bradshaw, Paul (2020). "The Dating of Christmas". In Larsen, Timothy (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Christmas. Oxford University Press. pp. 4–5.
  113. Hermann Usener, Das Weihnachtsfest. In: Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen, part 1. Second edition. Verlag von Max Cohen & Sohn, Bonn 1911.
  114. Hijmans 2024, pp. 1010–1011.
  115. Hijmans, S.E. (2009). The Sun in the Art and Religions of Rome. p. 588. ISBN 978-90-367-3931-3. Archived from the original on 10 May 2013.
  116. Nothaft, C. Philipp E. (2013). "Early Christian Chronology and the Origins of the Christmas Date". Questions Liturgiques/Studies in Liturgy. 94 (3). Peeters: 248. doi:10.2143/QL.94.3.3007366. Although HRT is nowadays used as the default explanation for the choice of 25 December as Christ's birthday, few advocates of this theory seem to be aware of how paltry the available evidence actually is.
  117. Roll, pp. 88–90; Duchesne, Louis, Les Origines du Culte Chrétien, Paris, 1902, 262 ff.
  118. Andrew McGowan. "How December 25 Became Christmas". Bible Review & Bible History Daily. Biblical Archaeology Society. Archived from the original on 14 December 2012. Retrieved 24 February 2011.
  119. Tucker, Karen B. Westerfield (2000). "Christmas". In Hastings, Adrian; Mason, Alistair; Pyper, Hugh (eds.). The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought. Oxford University Press. p. 114. ISBN 978-0-19-860024-4.
  120. Kelly, Joseph F. (2014). The Origins of Christmas. Liturgical Press. p. 76. ISBN 9780814648858.
  121. Nothaft (2013), pp. 263–264. "That Africanus was the source for a nativity on 25 December cannot be demonstrated with certainty, but the evidence is such that this possibility should be taken very seriously."
  122. Hijmans, S.E., Sol: The Sun in the Art and Religions of Rome, 2009, p. 584. " claim that as early as 221 Julius Africanus calculated the date as December 25 in his fragmentarily preserved Chronicle, but provide no reference. Wallraff, who directed the project that recently produced the first critical edition of all preserved fragments of the corpus of Julius Africanus (Wallraff 2007), has kindly informed me that he does not know of any such calculation by Africanus".
  123. Kelly, Joseph F. (2004). The Origins of Christmas. Liturgical Press. p. 60. ISBN 978-0-8146-2984-0. Online here Archived 19 February 2017 at the Wayback Machine.
  124. Schmidt, Thomas C. (2015). "Calculating December 25 as the Birth of Jesus in Hippolytus' Canon and Chronicon" (PDF). Vigiliae Christianae. 69 (5): 542–563. doi:10.1163/15700720-12341243. ISSN 1570-0720.
  125. Collinge, William J. (2012). Historical Dictionary of Catholicism. Scarecrow Press. ISBN 978-0-8108-5755-1. Archived from the original on 31 December 2015. Retrieved 23 December 2014.
  126. Roll, p. 87.
  127. Roll, p.89: "Duchesne adds  a conjecture which he does not support by direct reference to any patristic author or text: that Christ must have been thought to have lived a whole number of years, since symbolic number systems do not permit the imperfection of fractions  But Duchesne was forced to admit that: "this explanation would be the more readily received if we could find it fully stated in some author. Unfortunately we know of no text containing it"."
  128. ^ English, Adam C. (14 October 2016). Christmas: Theological Anticipations. Wipf and Stock Publishers. pp. 70–71. ISBN 978-1-4982-3933-2. First, we should examine the biblical evidence regarding the timing of the conception.  The angel Gabriel appeared to Zechariah, husband of Elizabeth and father of John the Baptizer, on the day he was chosen by lot to enter the sanctuary of the Lord and offer incense (Luke 1:9) Zechariah belonged to the tribe of Levi, the one tribe especially selected by the Lord to serve as priests. Not restricted to any one tribal territory, the Levite priests dispersed throughout the land of Israel. Nevertheless, many chose to live near Jerusalem in order to fulfill duties in the Temple, just like Zechariah who resided at nearby Ein Karem. Lots were cast regularly to decide any number of priestly duties: preparing the altar, making the sacrifice, cleaning the ashes, burning the morning or evening incense. Yet, given the drama of the event, it would seem that he entered the Temple sanctuary on the highest and holiest day of the year, the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur. There, beside the altar of the Lord, a radiant angel gave news of the child to be born to Elizabeth. The date reckoned for this occurrence is 24 September, based on computations from the Jewish calendar in accordance with Leviticus 23 regarding the Day of Atonement. According to Luke 1:26, Gabriel's annunciation to Mary took place in the "sixth month" of Elizabeth's pregnancy. That is, Mary conceives six months after Elizabeth. Luke repeats the uniqueness of the timing in verse 36. Counting six months from 24 September we arrive at 25 March, the most likely date for the annunciation and conception of Mary. Nine months hence takes us to 25 December, which turns out to be a surprisingly reasonable date for the birthday.  In Palestine, the months of November mark the rainy season, the only time of the year sheep might find fresh green grass to graze. During the other ten months of the year, animals must content themselves on dry straw. So, the suggestion that shepherds might have stayed out in the fields with their flocks in late December, at the peak of the rainy season, is not only reasonable, it is most certain.
  129. Luke 1:26
  130. Bonneau, Normand (1998). The Sunday Lectionary: Ritual Word, Paschal Shape. Liturgical Press. p. 114. ISBN 978-0-8146-2457-9. The Roman Church celebrates the annunciation of March 25 (the Roman calendar equivalent to the Jewish fourteenth Nisan); hence Jesus' birthday occurred nine months later on December 25. This computation matches well with other indications in Luke's gospel. Christians conjectured that the priest Zechariah was serving in the temple on the Day of Atonement, roughly at the autumnal equinox, when the angel announced to him the miraculous conception of John the Baptist. At her annunciation, Mary received news that Elizabeth was in her sixth month. Sixth months after the autumnal equinox means that Mary conceived Jesus at the vernal equinox (March 25). If John the Baptist was conceived at the autumnal equinox, he was born at the summer solstice nine months later. Thus even to this day the liturgical calendar commemorates John's birth on June 24. Finally, John 3:30, where John the Baptist says of Jesus: "He must increase, but I must decrease," corroborates this tallying of dates. For indeed, after the birth of Jesus at the winter solstice the days increase, while after the birth of John at the summer solstice the days decrease.
  131. Roll (1995), p. 88
  132. Roll, pp.93, 141
  133. Roll, p.92
  134. Roll, p.105
  135. Rouwhorst, Gerard (2020). "The origins and transformations of early Christian feasts". Rituals in Early Christianity. Brill. p. 43.
  136. "When was Jesus born?". Bibleinfo.com. Retrieved 1 December 2017.
  137. Morris 1988, p. 93.
  138. Freed 2001, pp. 136–137.
  139. Muhammad, Bilal (16 January 2020). "A Green Christmas: Jesus' Birthdate in the Islamic Tradition". Berkeley Institute for Islamic Studies. Retrieved 28 December 2022.

Sources


Further reading

External links

Jesus
Chronology
of Jesus's life
New Testament
Historicity
Depictions
Christianity
In other faiths
Family
Related
Timelines of religion
Christianity
Greek polytheism
Islam
Judaism
Hinduism
Other religions
Religion portal
Christianity
Bible
(Scriptures)
Foundations
History
(timeline)
(spread)
Early
Christianity
Great Church
Middle Ages
Modern era
Denominations
(list, members)
Western
Eastern
Restorationist
Theology
Philosophy
Other
features
Culture
Movements
Cooperation
Related
Categories: