Birth Of Christ

The Case for an Earlier Birth of Christ 

Revealed by the 62 weeks of Daniel chapter 9

The earliest and best know attempt to fix the date of the birth of Jesus Christ was by Dionysius Exiguus of Scythia Minor.  He replaced the “Anno Diocletiani” Roman system of dating based upon the hated Emperor Diocletian with “Anno Domini” (the year of our Lord) in 525 AD.  Two centuries later, the Venerable Bede of Northumbria published his history which expanded the system to include the years before Christ (BC) with no zero year.  Historians and scholars soon recognized that the date was not consistent with the history revealed in the scriptures.  Attempts have been made over the years to fix the date of Christ’s birth more precisely but matching both the evidence of the Bible with known history and scientific evidence has been difficult.  So, does it really matter if we know the correct date?         

The Problem and why it Matters

Luke gives us the most detailed account of the birth of Jesus Christ.  Current technology gives us access to a wealth of information about the history of the Roman Empire at the time of Christ.  Archeology has confirmed and, in some cases, clarified the historicity of biblical events. Computerized science provides amazing evidence about the astronomical history during the time of Christ.  Given two thousand years of study, it would seem safe to assume that we know the history of Christ…when Christ was born and the historical events surrounding his birth, how old he was at his death and when he died and how that relates to prophetic passages.  Yet few Biblical scholars and even fewer historians agree on all the factual dates and events.  One major problem is that the traditionally accepted Christian interpretation of when Christ was born and died, does not synchronize with the known history of the Roman Empire, revealed by Luke.  Additionally, traditional Christian views repeatedly describe the Magi arriving during the birth of Christ, despite biblical references that clearly question this concept.  Also, when we factor in the astronomical star events that Christian writers & scholars propose as Magi Star, the events proposed often post-date the historical death of Herod.  Finally, most Biblical theologians demand that Christ be only 33 years old at his death….yet a 33-year-old life does not conform to the known biblical and extra biblical historical facts of the Roman era.  These discrepancies cause biblical skeptics to call into doubt the historicity of Luke’s account of the birth of Christ and to cast doubt on the truth of scripture.  However, new revelations in the fields of archeology, history, and science (primarily accessible now because of information technology) are helping us better understand both the secular and biblical history of Christ’s birth and cast doubt on what was previously accepted as factual. 

For many Christians these discrepancies and issues do not seem important.  They feel that it makes little difference to their faith….they fully accept the biblical truth of Christ’s birth and see the exact date as irrelevant.  However, most historians and scientists, think that it is extremely important that truths in the academic disciplines synchronize with the truths in the Christian scriptures.  Why?  Because Christians believe all truth is God’s truth!   If God’s written revelation is to be defended as infallible, it is critical that the confirmable truths from the natural realm (history and science), reconcile with the Christian scriptures.  In a time where skepticism and disbelief of Christian truth is exploding, particularly among the younger generation, defense of scriptural truth is critical.  Consequently, reexamining the story of the birth, life and death in the light of new evidence IS important, and it very likely will lead us to a deeper understanding about the times and events of Christ’s life and in turn, will reinforce our confidence in the accuracy of scripture.   

Reexamination of the greatest story ever told

There are numerous clues in the New Testament that help us know when/where/& the historical persons/events involved with the birth and death of Jesus.  Here is a list of the most important clues that need to be examined, verified, and synchronized in order for us to better understand the story of Jesus Christ: 

  • The historically known dates of Caesar Augustus, Caesar Tiberius, Herod the Great, Publius Quirinius, Herod the Tetrarch and his brother Phillip. 
  • The dates and frequency of Roman taxations.  
  • The probable month in which Zacharias served as a priest prior to the birth of John the Baptist
  • The profession, location, length of the arduous journey, and the timing of the arrival of the Magi. 
  • Scientific understanding of the astronomical events of the first decade BC.  
  • The timing, length, and difficulty of the trip of Jesus’ family into Egypt.
  • The length of Jesus’s ministry and the number of times he attended the Passover.
  • Historical calendar dates of Fridays immediately prior to the Passover in the first century AD.
  • Jesus’ probable age at the beginning of his ministry as revealed in scripture.
  • Possible sources of the knowledge of Anna and Simeon about the Messiah’s birth.
  • Daniel’s prophecy of 70 weeks and other Old Testament prophecies about his birth.

Before we begin, however, to explore these questions, I believe it is appropriate to have a better understanding and context of the world into which Jesus was born…to see how God used first century BC culture and events to orchestrate the birth of his Son, at the right time and in the right place. 

 Israel had been under the domination of foreign powers for most of the six centuries prior to Christ’s birth.  After their captivity under the Babylonian Empire from 605 BC to 538-36 BC, Israel and most of the Middle East fell under the rule and authority of the Persian Empire.  The Persian’s dominated the ancient world for a 200-year period before being completely destroyed by the invading Greeks under the leadership of Alexander the Great in 331 BC.  After Alexander’s death at a relatively young age, his empire was divided by his subordinate generals and Israel fell first under the rule of the Ptolemies and then primarily under the rule of the Greek Seleucid Empire.  For a short period, Israel had limited autonomy under the Seleucids while led by the Jewish Maccabees.  Then came the Romans!  In 63 BC, the Roman General Pompey conquered this area and it was eventually made a Roman province.  To oversee Judea, Rome designated the loyal Idumean Herod the Great as Tetrarch in 41 BC.  He later was officially recognized as Rome’s client “king of Israel” in 37 BC.  The Idumeans were Edomites who were forcibly converted to Judaism by the Maccabees.  Thus, we can see why Herod saw himself as justified in claiming the title of king of the Jews.  It was during Herod’s reign that the events of the birth of Christ took place.  

The Story Begins.  The New Testament tells us that Mary, a young Jewish girl identified by Luke as being from the parental lineage of David, was visited by the Angel Gabriel and told she would conceive a child by the power of God, and the pronouncement of the angel clearly identifies this child as the Son of the Highest (Messiah).  Mary was already engaged to Joseph, identified by Matthew as also being from the lineage of David.  Both Mary and Joseph lived in Nazareth in the area of Israel called Galilee and engagements in this time and culture, we are told, were required to last for one year prior to marriage.  It is nearly impossible to imagine the shame that Mary’s pregnancy would have brought on the young engaged couple.  First, they were not permitted to consummate the marriage until the one-year engagement had lapsed.  Secondly, pregnancy out of wedlock was an act punishable by banishment or even death in some cases.  Clearly, Mary was shielded from this shame by the leading of the Holy Spirit, who informed her of the late-life pregnancy of her relative Elizabeth who lived in the Judean hills.  This provided a way for Mary to leave Nazareth and avoid the obvious questions that would surround her own pregnancy.  Scripture says she fled in haste and dwelled with her cousin (Elizabeth), who, by this time, was said to be in her sixth month of pregnancy.  Mary’s sojourn in Judea, during the early months of her own pregnancy, protected her from scandal at home while providing the sorely needed support of someone who accepted her miraculous conception (see Luke 1).  During her stay, Mary learned that Elizabeth and her husband Zacharias (a Priest of the lineage (course) of Abijah, a descendent of Arron) would bear a son who eventually would be named John.  This John would become John the Baptist, the one who would baptize Jesus and prepare the way for Christ’s ministry.  Zacharias’ lineage and priestly duties, as part of the Abijah course, will help us determine the approximate month/season of Jesus’ birth.  So that is where we should begin our investigation.  We are told in the book of Luke that Zacharias was performing his priestly duties in the temple when he was told by an angel that his wife Elizabeth would conceive a child.  Scripture further tells us that Elizabeth was in her sixth month of pregnancy when Mary arrived to stay with her.  This occurred immediately after Mary’s own conception.  This allows us to fix the month/season of Christ’s birth as approximately nine months after first visiting Elizabeth….or 15 months after the time of Zacharias’ priestly duties mentioned in Luke (we will examine this in detail later in this article).    

Scripture also tells us that Mary left Elizabeth after a three-month visit and returned to Nazareth.  By then she would have been visibly showing her pregnancy.  We can only imagine the conversation Mary had with her parents and Joseph trying to explain the situation!  It is understandable that Joseph may have seen this as shame on his own reputation.  Matthew tells us Joseph, being a just (righteous) man, did not want to harm Mary and planned to secretly put her into some type of protected isolation.  Again, an angel intervenes in Mary’s life, persuading Joseph to take Mary as his wife in order to protect the holy child she carried.  Although Joseph followed the Angel’s leading and took Mary as his wife, it most likely did not prevent the inevitable scandal and shame generated by her early pregnancy.  God, again, leads to protect, not only His Son, but also Joseph and Mary.  Luke tells us that Caesar Augustus, the ruling Emperor of Rome, ordered a registration/taxation at this exact period.  Since Jews were strongly connected to their tribal heritage, it was natural, or perhaps even mandatory, for them to return to their own city/area of origin, for any registration.  Regardless of Joseph’s reason, this taxation provided a justification for Joseph and Mary, and the unborn child Jesus, to flee Nazareth and travel to Bethlehem.  It also places the birth of Jesus in the exact location predicted by the Old Testament prophets.  That is why the date of the Roman Census is critical to discovering the date of the birth of Christ.  With this background, we can now follow these clues from the New Testament writers, plus evidence from history and science, to determine the time, date, location and circumstances of Christ’s birth in Bethlehem.                            

Herod the Great & Caesar Augustus.  The most detailed account of the Birth and the historical context of Roman ruling authorities is found in the book of Luke.  That is important because Luke is believed by many to be a gentile believer.  He would have likely had more interest in, and knowledge of, the history of the Roman Empire at the time of the birth.  Luke said he “had a perfect understanding of all things from the very first” and saw it as his task to “set forth in order a declaration of those things”.  The first major clue that Luke gives us is that the birth events occur during the reign of Herod the Great.  Historian Josephus tells us that Mark Anthony, one of the three rulers of the Second Roman Triumvirate, made Herod a ruler (Tetrarch) in 41 BC (which we know from Roman history was the fourth year of the 184th Olympiad…a method used by Josephus and other historians to date Roman events).  Josephus also tells us Herod ruled for 37 years.  Later historians, using Josephus, findings of archeology, and the Roman historical markers of the Olympiad, firmly fix the date of the death of Herod as March of 4 BC.  I say firmly because there is little doubt by historians about this date.  Josephus also notes the rule of Herod the Great’s son Phillip, after Herod’s death, as beginning in 4 BC.  Josephus says that Philip died in the 20th year of Caesar Tiberius (20th year ending in August 34 AD) and that Phillip ruled for 37 years…meaning, with no zero year in the calendar, that Philip’s rule clearly began sometime in 4 BC.  

(Note: Attempts have been made to rearrange the key dating methods/battles/Olympiads for the Emperor period of Rome in order to make Herod’s death closer to 1 BC.  This allows theologians and astronomers to make Jesus exactly 30 years old at the beginning of the assumed date of his ministry and also allows for a 3/2 BC astronomical event to be widely proposed as the probable Star of Bethlehem.  The major problem with this theory is that, in addition to disregarding the research of hundreds of historians and rearranging much of Roman history during this period, it makes Herod’s sons co-rulers with him in the last few years of Herod’s life, something you will see later in this paper as highly improbable and unsupported by history.  It also presupposes that the Magi arrived at Bethlehem at the exact time of Jesus’ birth, something you will also see later as highly unlikely.)  

Matthew confirms in his gospel that the birth of Jesus took place when Herod was still on his throne (thus prior to March 4 BC).  Luke also indicates that the birth events occurred while Caesar Augustus (Octavianus) was the ruler in Rome.  Augustus is known to have reigned as sole emperor from 31 BC (after defeating Mark Anthony) until 14 AD.  All this evidence clearly places the birth of Christ during the lifetimes of Herod and Augustus and prior to March of 4 BC (date of Herod’s death…making the birth most certainly at least as early as the fall/winter of 5 BC) in order for Herod to have interacted with the events of the birth (since he is also known to have been deathly sick the last few months of his life).   

Roman Taxations.  Luke indicates that there was a decree that all the Roman world was to be taxed.  The Greek word indicates that this was a “registration” (indicating it was a poll tax or head count tax based upon counted population).  This is important because Joseph’s intent to be registered in his own tribe of Judah facilitated the travel of Joseph, Mary and the preborn Christ to Bethlehem of Judea during this taxation (exactly where prophecy said the Messiah would be born).  The earliest believed Roman historical mentioning of a registration/taxation under Augustus is 6 AD (established by historian Josephus as occurring in the 37th year after Caesar’s victory over Mark Anthony which occurred on September 2nd, 31 BC, thus around September 6 AD) and this seems to present a huge historical problem.  Historians have established that census/taxations occurred every 14 years in the later Roman Empire and that anyone 14 years or older had to be registered.  However, a book by Dominic Rathbone of King’s College London, shows that fragments of Egyptian taxations/registration records show an event in 12/13 AD in Ptolemaic Egypt (approximately 7 years after the 6 AD taxation).  Further, Egyptian records can be interpreted that prior to 12/13 AD, the census/taxation occurred every 7 years in Egypt, as opposed to the 14-year cycle in later Roman times. Rathbone contends that the 14-year cycle did not become the norm until 33/34 AD.  Further, he asserts that there were Egyptian taxations in 5/6 AD (a period confirmed by Josephus) and extrapolates back to possible ones in 3/2 BC and 10/9 BC.  However, he indicates there is documentable evidence that a pole tax occurred in 9/8 BC in Ptolemaic Egypt.  Since it is firmly believed Herod died in 4 BC, any taxations in 3/2 BC and 5/6 AD would have taken place after Herod’s death and Christ’s birth.  Additionally, we can assume that if Roman registration/taxations were held in the Roman province of Ptolemaic Egypt, it would have most certainly also been held in the Roman dominated Kingdom of Judea (Herod being put on the throne by the help of Rome).  That leaves the documented taxation in 9/8 BC as a reasonable historical candidate for the taxation mentioned by Luke.  However, as Titus Kennedy points out in his new book “Unearthing the Bible”, there is even stronger evidence for a 9/8 BC census.  He points out that archeological evidence from a tomb stone notes that Quintus Secundus, who served “under Publius Quirinius the legate of Caesar in Syria” conducted a census in Syria.  As we will see later Quirinius was in Anatolia/Syria from the time of his appointment in 12 BC as a Roman Consul for a number of years.  So, was there a census, under the authority of Caesar Augustus while Quirinius was in Syria?  Yes!  The “Res Gestae Divi Augusti” (written by Caesar Augustus) records that he ordered a census while Gaius Censorius was a Roman Consul (which occurred in 8 BC).  This cross references perfectly with the Egyptian census and the Secundus census mentioned above.  Could this also be the date for when Joseph and Mary would have traveled to Bethlehem to be taxed?  Before you scoff at that early date, Luke includes one other clue about this taxation. 

Quirinius. Luke states that the taxation occurred when Quirinius was Governor in Syria (King James translation). This seems to present another huge problem.  History confirms that Marcus Titius was Governor in Syria from 12 BC for a number of years followed by Gaius Saturninus (9 to 6 BC) and Publius Varus (6 to 4 BC).  Quirinius did not start his official (historically recorded) Governorship of Syria until 6 AD, a period well after the time of Christ’s birth.  However, history helps with this clue when it also records that in 12 BC, Augustus appointed the Roman general Quirinius as a Consul, of which there were only two per year in the whole Roman Empire.  Quirinius was campaigning in Asia Minor (the mountainous region of Cilicia), in support of Roman pacification of the area, with numerous Roman Legions.  His campaign lasted for a number of years which resulted in his appointment as a Proconsul upon expiration of his one-year Consulship.  He is identified as being in Antioch as a Proconsul (a Legate, much like a governor) by archeological evidence of the Pisidian Antioch tablet.  Pisidian Antioch was one of the command centers for Roman military activity in Asia Minor.  Since Cilicia (where he was campaigning) is adjacent to Syria (and in the time of Augusta is believed by many historians to be actually part of the Syrian province), there is ample evidence for Quirinius’ presence in Syria during a Roman taxation in 9/8 BC.  It is interesting to note the Greek word used by Luke to describe Quirinius: Luke identifies Quirinius as “hegemoneuo – “to act as a ruler” vice “hagemon – “chief person of a province”.   It is probable that Luke recognized Quirinius’ authority as a Proconsul/Legate but also recognized he was not filling the role of a chief person or governor.  It is also important to note that the governor in Syria during Quirinius’ Consulship was Marcus Titius (12-10 BC).  Titius was never a fully committed supporter of Augustus.  He had previously in his life supported Pompey, and then later Mark Anthony, before defecting to Augustus. So, it is reasonable for Augustus to have had his trusted general and Consul Quirinius very active in Asia Minor and Syria during Titius’s Governorship and subsequent governorship of Saturninus (9-6BC).  As the Proconsul, and as a Roman general and military authority in the region, Quirinius would also have been the most recognizable Roman figure in Asia Minor and would have also been responsible for the orderly execution of any Roman registration/taxation.  Amazingly, it is significant to note that the early Church father and historian Tertullian wrote that Jesus was born while Saturninus (who became Governor in 9 BC) was the Governor in Syria when Christ was born.  Since he lived approximately 100 years after the death of Christ, his understanding of the history surrounding the birth of Christ is very important.  Could Christ really have been born this early?  The answer to that question is yes, if we consider the events that follow his birth.

The Magi and the Star. The gospel of Matthew tells us that when Jesus was born, there came Magi from the east, believed to be Persian or Babylonian astronomers/astrologists, to look for the Christ.  They specifically were looking for the birth of the King of the Jews.  It is strongly probable that they had access to biblical writings from Jews who served in the Babylonian Empire during Israel’s captivity in the 5th and 6th century BC and knew the prophecies of the coming Messiah, perhaps even the writings of Daniel.  The Magi indicated they were alerted to this birth by the presence of a star.  Matthew also indicates that when they found Jesus, he was a “young child”, no longer called a babe or infant (see the different Greek words).

  (Note: This idea of the Magi visiting Jesus when he was a young child rather than a baby is supported by this Biblical reference, the fact they found him in a house, the fact that Joseph and family traveled over the harsh desert shortly thereafter with Jesus and all their belongings (an overly arduous journey for a newborn), in addition to the two-year dating given by the Magi to Herod when they met with him.) 

Recent revelations of stellar events in the first decade BC provide fascinating clues about a star event that may have alerted the Magi to the birth of Christ.  Assyrian historians and Astronomers have conclusively shown that there was a triple conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in Pisces in 7 BC (see Simo Parpola “The Magi and the Star”).  Parpola, a professor of Assyriology at the University of Helsinki, points out there are Babylonian historical records dated as early as 8 BC which predict the stellar events for the next year (7 BC), including the triple conjunction.  In other words, the Magi in Persia would have conclusively known in early 8 BC that there would be a triple conjunction the following year.  A University paper on this subject, quotes Parpola, “According to Babylonian astrology, Jupiter is the star of the highest deity of the universe (Marduk).  The deity’s representative on earth is the king, and his star is Saturn.  Mars, the star of the war god, also seemed to join the conjunction towards its end.  All these planets met in the constellation Pisces, which is associated with the god of wisdom, life and creation.  One can imagine (that the Magi) reasoned that the old-world order was ending and a new king, chosen by the god, was about to be born.”  This rare triple conjunction in Pisces occurs about every 800 years and was visible on May 27th, October 6th, and December 1st of 7 BC.  It involved Earth, Jupiter and Saturn being in the same line of sight (and Mars’ presence during the third conjunction).  Men of the Magi stature and wealth would not have undertaken a journey of nearly a thousand miles (an arduous and expensive 50+ day trip by camel caravan) if they were not sure of the importance of the star and confirmation of a significant political event.  Confirmation from ancient Israeli writings could have possibly provided this assurance to the Magi.    

The Magi are recorded in Matthew as telling Herod they had tracked the event for two years (probably since it was first predicted in early 8 BC), which would have been nearly two years before they could have arrived in Jerusalem during the third and final conjunction in December 7 BC.  Herod is recorded as using this information to order the death of all children in Bethlehem, aged two years old and younger, shortly after his meeting with the Magi.  It is interesting that historical records indicate that Herod also ordered the death of his own two sons in 6 BC, as they were traveling home from Rome, and the death of his first wife & his firstborn Antipater just prior to his own death.  His fear of being usurped as King drove him to insane acts of evil. (Note: These events, in and of themselves, make it highly unlikely that Herod ever allowed Archelaus, Phillip, and Antipas/Herod the Tetrarch to co-rule with him as suggested by those attempting to move Herod’s death closer to 1 BC).  While there is no guarantee that this astronomical event was the star mentioned in the New Testament, it certainly fits with all of the narrative in Matthew and Luke.  Additionally, I believe that any star event must have also included Divine guidance.  While they would likely have observed the conjunction in the sky on 1 December as they traveled to Jerusalem/Bethlehem to look for the child (following Herod’s order of where to search), they also must have been provided providential direction to the exact house where Jesus lived…plus clear guidance in a dream not to return to Herod (which scripture records). 

Flight into Egypt.  Matthew tells us that Joseph was told in a dream (after the visit of the Magi) to flee to Egypt and to reside there until given further guidance.  This trip through the Sinai is over 300 miles long (most of it through rough barren desert terrain…terrain I have personally traveled over numerous times while serving as a UN Military Observer in Israel/Egypt).  The trip would have been extremely arduous and dangerous when attempted on foot, with a family, and personal belongings.  It also would have been an expensive relocation for a poor Jewish carpenter.  If this occurred after the Magi visit in December 7 BC, it means they would have had the financial means and ability to traveled in the early winter/spring of 6 BC to Egypt (winter being the best time to travel in the Sinai desert).  If they traveled to Egypt in early 6 BC and Herod died in March of 4 BC, these dates imply that they could have remained in Egypt for over 2 years (until Herod’s death).  This not only makes sense from a physical standpoint (given the arduous trip and the time and cost required to settle in a new land), but also fits with the other evidence we have previously discussed.       

Zacharias and the Priestly service.  Many scholars have attempted to fix the time of Zacharias’s service at the temple (as part of the course of Abijah) in an attempt to determine the exact month of Jesus’ birth.  First Chronicles of the Old Testament tells us there were 24 Israeli priests/families designated, in the time of David, for the ministry of the temple.  Each was to serve for one week…thus each family would serve every 168 days or twice a year.  Abijah was the eighth in line for duty.  However, differences arise about when this period starts and how the additional 4 weeks each year were covered.  Many scholars feel that the line of service was continuous….that each 168 days, the process started over.  Accordingly, a family or tribe would never serve the exact same months or days each year.  The problem with using this type of dating is, finding a known point in history where the Abijah family is identified as serving in association with a historical date/event. History lists a number of times that the service was “broken” by either captivity of the nation or domination/war with foreign powers.  It is therefore important to find a date close to Zacharias’ time to be sure that this concept can be used in dating Jesus’ birth.  In a book by Kenneth Frank Doig (Edwin Mellen Press 1990), he points out that Josephus provides that date for us.  Josephus tells us that the destruction of the temple in 70 AD occurred on August the 5th and the family of Jehoiarib was serving in the Temple.  Doig does reverse calculations to the probable period of Christ’s birth to show the months that the Abijah family (and possibly Zacharias) would have been serving.  He stops his calculations in 8 BC but by using his calculation method and taking it back two more years, we can discover that the Abijah family would have been responsible for the week-long service starting September 30th of 10 BC, March 17th of 9 BC, September 1st of 9 BC, February 16th 8 BC etc.  If Jesus was born two years prior to a December 7BC star event and arrival by the Magi…during the time of Quirinius’ Proconsulship in Asia Minor…during Augustus’ and Herod’s rule…during or just prior to a time of a taxation and census in 8 BC…then the most likely scenario is for Mary to have visited Elizabeth in March/April of 9 BC, 6 months after Zacharias’ service in September 30th of 10 BC, and delivered the Christ child nine months later in December of 9 BC!                           

Conclusions.  To say that the facts presented here are absolutely true is impossible.  However, all the historical and scientific evidence presented in this paper is presented with a high degree of certainty.  All this evidence points in one direction; to a possible birth in December of 9 BC, Magi arrival two years later in December 7 BC during the final triple conjunction, flight into Egypt in early 6 BC and death of Herod in 4 BC.  If Mary conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit in the month of March/April 9 BC (prior to visiting Elizabeth), she would have delivered in either December of 9 BC or perhaps even early January of 8 BC. This date fits perfectly with all of the clues given us in the scriptures.  It does mean Jesus would have been slightly older than exactly 30 years when his ministry began but if we read scripture properly, it says he was about 30 (an estimate implying at least 30), an important age requirement for him to fulfill the functions and duties of a priest/Rabbi (Numbers 4).  Also, as we will see later in this paper, Jesus could not have started his own public ministry before very late 29 or early 30 AD.  So, regardless of what date you choose for Herod’s death (either prior to March 4 BC as most historians agree or somewhere between 3/2 BC as proposed recently, Christ’s birth prior to Herod’s death would mean he was older than 30 when he started his ministry in 29/30 AD (a date I will defend later in this article).  It is interesting to also consider one other amazing event, recorded in history as having happened in 9 BC, that conforms with the coming of the Prince of Peace.  Caesar Augustus, Emperor of Rome, first entered the newly finished temple Ara Pacis and sacrificed in 9 BC (temple was completed and dedicated by Caesar in January 9 BC, this temple still exists today in Italy…reconstructed by Mussolini prior to WWII during his reign).  Caesar’s sacrifice famously signaled to the Roman world that Pax Romana (Roman Peace) had been brought to the world by Rome (and Caesar).  While Rome was declaring to the world in 9 BC through its Emperor, that they had brought world-wide peace, God was declaring in Bethlehem that same year, by the birth of His son (the Prince of Peace), that He had brought true peace to the world; reconciliation of man with God! 

Reconciliation of Prophecy with a 9 BC Birth.  One of the most intriguing prophecies about the coming of the Messiah is found in Daniel chapter 9.  God revealed to Daniel that seventy weeks were determined upon the people of Israel. These weeks are nearly unanimously believed by Bible scholars to represent seventy weeks, of seven years each, or 490 years. Daniel writes in 9:24 that the weeks apply to “his people & the holy city.” (Note: Since we know that the Church is called the Israel of God in the New Testament in several passages, and that Christians are the spiritual sons of Abraham, it is fair to conclude that “his people” in verse 24 of chapter 9 does not refer just to the physical people of Israel, but also to all believers in Christ, giving the prophecy a much deeper/dual interpretation.  It is also possible to have the term “holy city” refer not only to Jerusalem but also to the kingdom of God, as in St Augustine’s City of God).  

It is important to note that Daniel’s vision appears to be an example of Biblical Alternating Parallelism; something not uncommon in Psalms and Proverbs.  Daniel is told by an angel that the 70 weeks will accomplish six things (on his people and the holy city…see Daniel 9:24): “Seventy weeks are determined (A) upon thy people and (B) upon thy holy city, to (A) finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to (B) bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most high.”   If we apply “A-B-A-B Alternating Parallelism” and understand that all the A events refer to personal relationships between people and God and all of the B events refer to the collective Kingdom of God, then we can paraphrase: 

  • A.  People (believers) will experience the finishing of the condemnation of sin (as Jesus said, it is finished), see their own sins ended and covered by the blood of Christ, and experience reconciliation with God (justification)….all referring to the first coming of Christ.
  • B.  The City (kingdom of God) will see the Kingdom come with everlasting righteousness, see the prophecy and visions fulfilled as God promised, and experience the anointing and exalting of Christ at the Throne of God…..all apparently referring to the second coming of Christ. 

It is important to note that the A events were obviously accomplished by Jesus at the cross, while it can be argued that the B events await complete fulfillment at the end of the age at Christ’s return, giving this prophecy a dual meaning (we will see the dual nature of the prophecy again in the next verse).  

Daniel’s vision in the next verse (Dan 9:25) also appears to be a variation of Alternating Parallelism and contains six elements.  Daniel is told: “Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to (A) restore and (B) to rebuild Jerusalem, unto the (A) Messiah – (B) the Prince, shall be (A) seven weeks, and (B) threescore and two weeks: the streets shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”  Viewed as alternating parallelism it would be read:

  • A – Command to Restore Jerusalem
  • B – The Prince
  • A – 7 Weeks (7×7=49 years)
  • B – Command to Rebuild Jerusalem
  • A – The Messiah
  • B – 62 Weeks (62×7=434 Years)

Explanation/defense:  If Jerusalem implies the physical city/nation of Israel in this verse, all the “Restore Jerusalem” events refer to a command to restore Jerusalem as a capital, to the Prince, will be 7 weeks (49 years).  All the “Rebuild Jerusalem” events refer to a command to physically rebuild Jerusalem, to the Messiah, will be 62 weeks (434 years).  Many scholars have lumped the dates, commands and listed individuals into one event; the first coming of Christ (see Ironside).  However, when we examine the commands, we cannot find one command in the ancient history of Israel that accomplishes both a rebuilding of Jerusalem and restoration of Jerusalem (as in restoration as a capital of a Jewish state).  Secondly, (and this is most important) the Hebrew word for Prince in Daniel 9:25 is only used five different times in the Old Testament (beside this verse).  In each instance, the individual described is opposing God:  Jeroboam when he separated Israel from Judah and caused Israel to worship falsely and wickedly at Bethel, Job when he arrogantly and unwisely opposed/resisted God’s will in Job chapter 31, Proverbs 28 where it refers to a prince who is a great oppressor, Ezekiel 28 where it refers prophetically to Satan’s prince, and Daniel 9:26 where it specifically refers to the Satanic Anti-Christ.  Why would God use this same word to describe his Son in verse 25?  It seems compelling that the Messiah the Prince are two different individuals.  Third and most compelling argument, Daniel specifically tells us in verse 26 that after the sixty-two weeks event, the Messiah will be cut off (crucified), specifically connecting the 62 weeks to the coming Messiah. I firmly believe, that two distinct events are described by these six elements and are presented in a variation of Alternating Parallelism; one encompassing the first coming of Christ (Messiah) and the second describing events at the end of the age and coming of the Prince (Satanic Anti-Christ).      

Based upon a two-event view of the 70 weeks, we need to look for “commands” that could be used for predicting this prophecy. We know that a command was given by Cyrus the Persian to let Ezra return and rebuild the temple in the first year after his capture of Babylon.  However, it only dealt with the rebuilding of the Temple and not the rebuilding of Jerusalem or restoration as a capital of Israel.  We also know from the book of Nehemiah that a command was given by the Persian King Artaxerxes the 1st, to allow Nehemiah to go to Jerusalem and rebuild the city (streets and gates) which were in ruin—even giving him the resources to do this task. Most scholars believe this is the rebuild command mentioned by Daniel (and so do I).  What we do not have in the Old Testament is a command to restore Jerusalem (implying restoring it as the capital of a nation). The Persian kings were allowing freedom of worship and tolerance to captured peoples, but not independence from their autocratic rule. Nehemiah tells us that this command (to rebuild) was given in the month of March in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes’ rule.  History reveals the following about Artaxerxes:

  • His father Xerxes was assassinated in mid-465 BC by Antabanus of his royal guard.
  • Antabanus also is believed to have killed Xerxes’ eldest son Darius (blaming the assassination of Xerxes on Darius).
  • Antabanus seized power and is believed to have ruled as King for a very short period of less than one year before Artaxerxes discovered the truth about his father’s and brother’s deaths and killed Antabanus. Artaxerxes took the throne of Persia sometime in mid-464 BC.
  • Persian Regal years were numbered based upon the Persian calendar.  The first month of the Persian calendar started on 21 March of any given year (New Year’s Day).  
  • Since the first year of a new king’s rule in Persia was considered a “year of ascension” and not a year of historic numbered rule (to prevent two rulers having a Regal year in the same calendar year), the first numbered year of Artaxerxes would have commenced a year later on March the 21st, 463 BC.
  • That means that Artaxerxes twentieth year would have begun on March the 21st 444 and ended on March the 20th, 443 BC.
  • Now Nehemiah throws a twist into the process when he tells us in Jewish months the events of this command.  He says he is visited by Hanani in the month Chisleu (December) of the 20th year of the king (which would be December of 444BC)….and that he prays and fasts and then goes before the king in the month Nisan (March) of the 20th year of the king (which would have had to be early March 443BC before the 21 March New Year and prior to the beginning of the kings 21st year).  So, the command was given in early March of 443 BC.    

We now must advance 434 years, if this command and the sixty-two weeks applies to the coming of the Messiah (as Daniel indicates in chapter 9 of his book).  But, what kind of years were they: Jewish religious calendar or the solar calendar? We are told by many biblical scholars (Ironside included) that these years must be Jewish religious calendar years of only 354 days. It may be true that it is from the religious calendar, but what they then conveniently “omit” is the extra month Ve-adar which was added back in every three years to keep the religious calendar in sync with the solar calendar. So, 434 Jewish religious calendar years (with Ve-adar added in every three years) would equate to exactly 434 solar calendar years. If we subtract 434 from March 443 BC, we come to March of 9 BC!  Amazingly, this is exactly the same year and month we calculated for the Immaculate Conception of Christ the Messiah (and because we believe life begins at conception, the coming of Christ).  Mary’s conception in March/April would result in a birth in December of 9 BC/January 8 BC.  Not only do all the clues of Matthew and Luke point to 9 BC but I believe the most specific prophecy of the Old Testament agrees with this date.  Perhaps this is also why Anna, Simeon and the Magi were looking/anticipating the birth of the Messiah!     

Because this paper is being written to focus on the first coming of Christ, I will forgo discussing the second half of Daniel’s prophecy.  What this paper does show is that we have an amazingly accurate prediction and record of the birth of Christ.  We know God’s Word is credible, accurate, and truthful.   However, it’s compatibility with revealed history and science, reinforces our faith and trust in the truth of the story of Christ’s birth and gives us confidence in the remainder of the story of Christ’s ministry and death revealed in the New Testament (it also provides tools to defend the scriptures against the attack by skeptics).    

Ministry & Death of Christ.  Finally, I think it is important to this theory to examine the historical evidence for the ministry and death of Christ as revealed in the New Testament.  Luke tells us that the ministry of John the Baptist began in the 15th year of Caesar Tiberius.  Here we run again into theologians who are willing to alter history to make it fit their view of scripture and in order to make it align with Ironside’s concept of Daniel’s 70 weeks.  History is very clear that Tiberius began to reign in the month of August/September of 14 AD.  While Tiberius did have a co-regency with Augustus after 12 AD (after returning from his campaign against the Germanic tribes), the Roman Senate clearly withheld the titles of Augustus, Pater Patriae and the Civic Crown.  By making a Co-regency they insured a smooth transition of power for the ailing Caesar Augustus and probably wanted to ensure that there would be good leadership during the Roman census during the 12/13 AD years.  However, they had not given the crown to Tiberius.  That did not happen officially until August/September 14 AD after Augustus’ death.  All historians and all historical records date Tiberius’ reign as beginning in 14 AD.  Surly the precise and historically accurate Luke would have understood this when he referred to the 15th year of Tiberius’ reign.    Accepting 14 AD as the beginning of his reign, we can calculate that the 15th year of Tiberius began in August/September of 28 AD.  John the Baptist would have started his ministry after that in late 28 or more likely early 29 AD.  Matthew tells us that Jesus did not begin his official ministry in Galilee until after he had been baptized by John (John’s ministry was already well established at this point…probably late 29 AD), been tempted in the wilderness (40 days), and heard that John the Baptist was cast in prison.  Reasonably, (giving John’s ministry time to mature, the baptism and temptation of Christ to occur, and giving Herod time to cast John into prison) we can conclude that Jesus’ public ministry probably could not have begun earlier than early 30 AD.  

Death.  The gospel of John shows that there were at least two, but most likely three Passovers that Jesus attended during his public ministry (John 2, John 6 and John 12).    All the gospels support the death of Jesus on a Friday, at the beginning of the Passover season.  Scholars have conclusively shown that there were only two Fridays that fell on preparation day during the period of Christ’s possible crucifixion; Friday of 30 AD and Friday of 33 AD.  Referencing the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, the book of John indicates that Jesus had already begun his ministry, called his disciples, attended the wedding feast, and gone to Capernaum where he resided for a period of time, prior to attending the first Passover with his disciples in John chapter 2.  It is impossible for Christ to have begun his public ministry in early 30 AD, accomplished all that we just discussed, and still have died on the Passover in March of 30 AD.  It is just as improbable that he started his ministry in early 30 AD, accomplished all that we discussed, and even attended his first Passover with the disciples in 30 AD.  If there were three Passovers during Jesus’s ministry (as John indicates) and the first one occurred after he had started his ministry in 30 AD, called his disciples, attended the wedding feast, resided for a while in Capernaum accomplishing significant ministry in Galilee, it is reasonable to assume that Jesus’ first public ministry Passover most likely occurred in 31 AD (John 2).  That would have placed the second in 32 AD (John 6) and the third, when he died, in 33 AD (John 12).  This would place his death on a Friday preparation day and also account for a three-year ministry of Jesus, something long believed by the Church.      

The Church has long been guided by a fixed date of Jesus being exactly 30 years old starting his ministry, and 33 at his death.  This belief has caused Biblical scholars to force a birth just three months before Herod’s death in March of 4 BC and a death during a Passover in 29 AD or 30 AD (or they have attempted to redefine Herod’s death as late as1 BC).  In order to do this, Biblical scholars have rejected both historical and archeological evidence about rulers/historical events & the timeline of ministry events prior to Christ’s death as described in Matthew, Luke and John.  It is understandable that in earlier Church history, there was inadequate access to written or archeological evidence to conclusively fix the dates of Christ’s birth and death. Given the wealth of new evidence available in the information rich 20th and 21st centuries, it is reasonable to consider this new look at the events of the birth and death of Christ.  So, why is it important?  The Bible claims that all scripture is given by inspiration of God.  I believe that claim, and I also believe that in order to have certainty about our faith, scripture must be reliable.  Reliability means synchronization with other known truths.  Clearly, the discussion in this paper is important.    

One other intriguing fact conforms with this proposed timeline of Jesus’ life and death. Calculating the birth and death times proposed in this paper, we can see that Christ was probably 37 when he began His ministry and would have just turned 40 when he died and made redemption for all the Church.  One of the most significant types of Christ in the Old Testament is…..Joseph.  He, like Christ, was rejected by his own people, taken into Egypt, later tempted, then falsely accused, and finally used by God to save the sons of Abraham.  He is known to have been 30 years old when he was released from prison and spent the next 7 years overseeing the gathering of the Egyptian harvest (making him 37 at the end of this period).  It is also known that he told his brothers it had been over 2 years since the famine period had begun when they came looking for food (making Joseph 39).  Given the time for the return trip by his brothers to their father, it means Joseph was most certainly 40 years old when he redeemed his father and family (all Israel) from starvation and destruction and brought them into Egypt.  Amazing similarities!

In summary, this paper is written to reconcile and defend the evidence given in the Bible about the birth and death of Christ.  We have demonstrated that the known/verifiable truths from history and science do NOT contradict the scriptures, but do in fact, support what is revealed by the writers and prophecies about the coming Messiah.  As St Augustine said nearly 1600 years ago, “All truth is God’s truth” (Nay, but let every good and true Christian understand that wherever truth may be found, it belongs to his Master).  This concept is under assault by the current culture, a culture that makes truth relative, a culture that is more than willing to contradict the scriptures with historical and scientific facts.  But when a thorough study of both the scriptures and history/science is made, it is comforting to know that there is reconciliation and conformity with all of these truths.  We do well to remind ourselves, any time there arises skepticism about scriptural truth and natural truth, of the words of God from the book of Numbers:

  God is not human, that he should lie,
not a human being, that he should change his mind.
Does he speak and then not act?
Does he promise and not fulfill?  Numbers 23:19  

The answer to Numbers 23:19 is yes…he fulfills his promises exactly as he spoke/revealed in scripture!

(This paper was drafted by John A. Clauer, Spring of 2021.)