- INTRODUCTION - The Problem.
In this section we shall deal with the problem:
When did the birth, death, and resurrection Jesus take place?
- ANALYSIS OF PROBLEM.
In A.D. 525, Pope John I asked a Scythian monk, Dionysius, to prepare a
standard calendar for the Western Latin Church. Since he did not want
the history of the Christian Church to be based upon the life of a
persecutor of the church, the Roman Emperior Diocelian, as the Alexandrian
system of dating did in his day, Dionysius based his new standard calendar
upon the birth of Christ, the incarnation of the Son of God. He choose as
the beginning of the Christian era January 1, 754 A.U.C.
(anno urbis conditae "year of the foundation of the city [of Rome]")
and as the date of the birth of Christ December 25 of the preceding year,
753 A.U.C. So the 754 A.U.C. became A.D. 1 in this new calendar of Dionysius.
The years before this date are designated by B.C. (Before Christ) and years
after this date by A.D. (Anno Domini "year of the Lord") with no zero
year between 1 B.C. and 1 A.D.
But later research found that the latest year of Herod's death was 750 A.U.C.
and since according to the Gospel of Matthew Christ's birth was before Herod
died, Dionysius' date of the birth of Christ was obviously wrong, which is
generally recognized today. How much before this date was Christ born?
- CLUE TO SOLUTION.
There is a wide divergence of opinion as to that exact date. Christ's birth
has been dated as early as 20 B.C. and as late as 4 B.C., depending upon the
date Herod's death. According to the Gospel of Luke 2:1, Christ was born
during the reign of the Roman Caesar Augustus, whose reign was from March 15,
44 B.C. to August 19, A.D. 14. Since this is so broad a span of time, one
needs to narrow this time span. In an attempt to arrive at a more specific
date, it is essential to establish time limits, the termini a quo
(the earliest time limit) and the terminus ad quem (the latest time
limit). According to the Gospels, the terminus ad quem is the death of
Herod the Great and the termini a quo is the census of Quirinus
(Cyrenius).
- TERMINUS AD QUEM: THE DEATH OF HERIOD THE GREAT.
According to Matthew 2:1 and Luke 1:5, the birth of Jesus came before Herod's
death. Herod was proclaimed king of the Jews by the Roman Senate in late
40 B.C. by the nomination of Anthony and Octavian. With the help of the
Roman army Herod gained the possession of his domain in 37 B.C. He reigned for
thirty-seven years from the time when he was proclaimed king, or thirty-four
years from the time of his possession of his domain.
According to Josephus, an eclipse of the moon occurred shortly before Herod's
death. It is the only eclipse of the moon mentioned by Josephus and this
occurred on March 12/13, 4 B.C. After Herod's death there was a celebration
of the Passover, the first day of which would have occurred on April 11, 4 B.C.
Hence, Herod's death occurred between March 12th and April 11th. And since
the thirty-fourth year of Herod's reign would have begun on Nisan 1, 4 B.C.
(March 29, 4 B.C.), his death must have occurred sometime between March 29 and
Apirl 11, 4 B.C. Therefore, Christ could not be born later than March/April
of 4 B.C.
- TERMINI A QUO: THE CENSUS OF QUIRINUS.
According to Luke 2:1-5, a census was taken just before the birth of Jesus.
"In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world
was to be taxed." Thus, Christ could not have been born before the census.
The purpose of the census was to provide data necessary for leving of taxes
in provinces. This census mentioned by Luke is one of the difficult problems
of New Testament Studies. The historical accuracy of Luke's statement has
been questioned because
- nothing is known in history of a general census in the time of Augustus;
- in a Roman census Joseph would not have had to travel to Bethlehem,
but would have registered in the principal town of his residence, Nazareth,
and Mary would not have had to register at all;
- no Roman census would have been made during Herod's reign;
- Josephus records nothing of census in the time of Herod, rather a
census in A.D. 6-7 would have been something new to the Jews;
- and a census held under Quirinius could not have occurred during the
reign of Herod, since Quirinius was not governor until after Herod's death.
These are weighty objections, but they can be answered.
- Census in the reign of Augustus.
There is sufficient evidence of a census being taken periodically under
the Roman Republic and by Augustus in 28 B.C. and on subsequent occasions.
In Gaul, where there was resistance, censuses were conducted in 27 and 12
B.C., and in Cyrene in 7 B.C. In Egypt there were censuses taken in fourteen
year intervals beginning with 9 B.C. Luke's statement has been challenged by
those who claim that there was never a single census of the entire Roman
Empire. But is this what Luke meant? Probably not. What Luke meant is that
censuses were taken at different times in different provinces; Augustus being
the first one in history to order a census or tax asessment of the whole
provincial empire. This is supported by the fact that Luke uses the present
tense of the verb "went out", indicating that Augustus ordered censuses to be
taken regularly rather than only at one time. Thus it is reasonable to believe
that there was an order for a general census in the time of Augustus.
- Travel to home for census.
It it claimed that that the Romans would not have compelled Joseph as
well as Mary to go to Bethlehem. It is claimed that Roman law states that
the property owner had to register only in the district where his property
was situated. But there is a papyrus of A.D. 104 where the perfect of Egypt
ordered Egyptians to return to their home so that the census may be taken.
Since the property of Jews was the property of the father's estates, the
Romans would comply to the custom by laying claim to one's family's estate
in order to assess it for taxation. Every person needed to appear so that
a proper assessment of his property can be made. And for this reason Mary
would have needed to go also.
- Roman census during the reign of Herod.
It is claimed that Augustus would not have taken a census in Palestine
during the reign of Herod. Herod had enough autonomy as indicated by his
being allowed to mint coins. But Romans did take census in vassal kingdoms.
But Herod came into disfavor with Augustus and was treated as a subject rather
than as a friend. This means that Herod's autonomy was taken away. And since
Herod was getting old and was having trouble with his sons who were struggling
to acquire his throne, it was a good time for Augustus to take an
assessment of the domain before Herod's death.
- No confusion of the censuses.
It is claimed that since Josephus makes no mention of a Roman census in
Palestine in the time of Herod, the census taken after Archelaus' deposition
in A.D. 6 was something new and unheard of. But the first part of this
argument is an argument from silence. There could have been census with no
distrubance and hence there was nothing significant to be mentioned by
Josephus.
- The governorship of Quirinius and the census.
It is claimed that census under Quirinius could not have occurred during
Herod's reign because Quirinius was not governor until after Herod's death.
This is a formidable objection. It raises questions about the historicity
of Luke. The critics say that Luke's dating of the birth of Jesus with the
census of Judea, which Josephus places after the deposition of Archelaus in
A.D. 6, is a clear historical blunder. But this objection is based on a
mistranslation of Luke 2:2; "This was the first census, when Quirinius was
governor of Syria." It should be translated, "This census was before that
[census] when Quirinius was governor of Syria." Strictly speaking, the
Greek word protos in classical Greek means "first", but that meaning
in Koine Greek was changed to "earlier" or "before". In John 1:15 and 30 it
has this meaning, protos mou en, "he was before me". In John 15:18
the protos, being used adverbially, is equivalent to pro, that
is, "It [the world] hated me before it hated you." Thus in Luke 2:2
the Greek means,
"This census took place before Quirinus was govenor of Syria."
Luke is not distinguishing this census as the "first" census in a series of
censuses that occurred during the governorship of Quirinius, but is merely
stating that the census at the time of the birth of Jesus took place sometime
before Quirinius held office. This gives good sense to the passage and avoids
the supposed historical blunder. Luke was obviously aware of when the census
of Quirinius took place, since he mentions it in Acts 5:37. He knew that
Jesus was not born that date, for he states in Luke 1:5 that the birth of John
the Baptist and of Jesus took place in the days of Herod. And this agrees
with Matthew's chronology (Matt. 2:1).
The exact date of the census cannot be determined with precision. But it is
reasonable to think that the census would have occurred after Herod came into
disfavor with Augustus in 8/7 B.C. And more specifically it was probably
after Herod executed his sons Alexander and Aristobulus in 7 B.C. There was
an intense struggle for Herod's throne by his other sons which resulted in
Herod changing his will three times before his death in the spring of 4 B.C.
In 7 B.C. Herod named Antipater as sole heir and then in 5 B.C. a new will was
drawn up, making Antipas the heir. Finally, five days before Herod's death
Antipater was executed and a final will was drawn up that named Archelaus as
king of the whole realm. And there was not only intrigues within the
household, but Herod's illness became more intense. His death was imminent.
With such instability and Herod's bad health, it was an opportune time for
Augustus to have a census taken in order to assess the situation before
Herod's death. Augustus was aware of the situation in Palestine, because
each time Herod changed his will and each time he wanted to get rid of one of
his sons, he had to ask the emperor's permission. Therefore, it would have
been reasonable and most probable to believe that a census within the last two
years of Herod's reign was taken.
The exact date of this census, which would mark the terminius a quo
of the birth of Jesus, is difficult to determine exactly, but it probably
took place sometime between 6 and 4 B.C., probably near the end of this
time span. This fits with the both Matthew's and Luke's chronologies,
which seem to indicate that the census occurred shortly before Herod's death
in 4 B.C.
Having narrowed the the date of Christ's birth to between 6 and 4 B.C., other
chronological notes should be considered. In Matthew 2 Herod saw that he
had been tricked by the Magi when they did not return to Herod to report
the location of the newborn King of the Jews, and consequently Herod had all
the male children two and under in Bethlehem and the surrounding area
slaughtered. When the Magi visited Christ, he and his parents were no longer
in a stable, but had moved into a house (Matt. 2:11). But this could have
occurred soon after Christ's birth and does not mean that Christ would be
two years old when the Magi visited him. Herod had had the children
two years and younger killed only to be sure he got the newborn king. This is
not out of character with Herod. Therefore it is reasonable to think that
the slaying of children occurred soon after Christ's birth.
Thus the evidence seems to lead to the conclusion that Christ's
birth may have occurred sometimes in late 5 B.C. or eartly 4 B.C.
- SOLUTION - THE DAY OF CHRIST'S BIRTH.
There has been much discussion about the day of Christ's birth. Those
who have studied this question have advocated almost every month of year.
We will not investigate all these dates but look only at the two traditional
dates, which are December 25th and January 6th. In the Western Latin Church
the traditional date of December 25th was proposed by Hippolytus
(ca. A.D. 165-235). The choice of 25 December for the birth of Jesus
was almost certainly chosen because that day was the great pagan day in honor
of the sun, and in Rome in the fourth century that pagan festival was
transformed into a Christian festival. In the Eastern Greek Church the date
of January 6th is the date not only of the birth of Christ, but also the
arrival of the Magi on his second birthday, His baptism in His twenty-ninth
year by John the Baptist, and His first miracle and sign at Cana in His
thirtieth year. However, the eastern Greek theologian Chrysostom
(A.D. 345-407) in A.D. 386 stated that the December 25th is the correct date
and hence is the offical date for birth of Christ in the Eastern Church (the
January 6th date is then the date of the manifestation of Christ to the Magi,
His baptism, etc.).
There is one objection raised to the midwinter birth of Jesus; the shepherds
attended their flocks during the night (Luke 2:8), but usually the sheep were
taken into enclosures from November until March and were not in the fields at
night. But this is not conclusive evidence against December being the time
of the birth of Jesus; the following reasons are against this objection:
- It could have been a mild winter and the shepherds would be outside with
their sheep.
- It is not at all certain that the sheep were brought under cover during
the winter months. It is true that during the winter months the sheep were
brought from the wilderness, but the Lukan narrative states that the shepherds
were around Bethlehem (rather than the wilderness), thus indicating that Jesus
was born during the winter months.
- The Misnah implies that sheep around Bethelhem were outside all year, and
those that were worthy for the Passover offerings were in the fields thirty
days before the feast, which would be as early as February, one of coldest
and rainiest months of the year.
Thus the December date of the birth of Jesus is plausable.
In conclusion, the exact date of the birth of Jesus Christ is difficult to
determine precisely. However, the midwinter date is most probable.
From our study it is clear that Christ was born before Herod's death and
after the census. Looking at the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke,
it is clear that Jesus Chirst was born of Mary within one or two years
of the death of Herod. And looking at other chronological evidence in
the Gospels, the evidence leads to the conclusion that Jesus Christ was
born in the winter of 5/4 B.C. Although the exact date of Christ's birth
cannot be known, either December 25th or January 6th are most probable.
From the narratives in Matthew and Luke it is clear that Joseph and Mary
went from Nazareth to Bethlehem for the census (Luke 2:4-5). Jesus was
born in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:6). There was a visitation by the
shepherds (Luke 2:8-20) and then by the Magi (Matt. 2:1-12). At the end of
eight days, Jesus was circumcised (Luke 2:21). Being warned by a dream
in Bethlehem, Joseph, Mary and the baby Jesus went to Egypt until Herod's
death and then returned to Nazareth (Matt. 2:13-23). Jesus was presented
to God in Jerusalem and then returned to Nazareth (Luke 2:21-39). At the
age of twelve Jesus went to Jerusalem and then returned to Nazareth
(Luke 2:40-52).