Saturday, December 24, 2011
Jesus' Birthday from Scripture
Here's a rather dour Protestant explaining why Jesus was born on December 25 using only the sacred Scriptures. Combine this with my recent article for Crisis magazine and Taylor Marshall's arguments from the date for the angel appearing to Zechariah which you'll find here, and the evidence builds up. Today Taylor has posted again on this topic--giving more evidence from the Apostolic Fathers to the early establishment of Dec 25 as the date for the Nativity of Christ the Lord--linked with the date for the Annunciation. His latest post is here.
Time to put to rest the old Puritan lie that "Christmas is just the pagan Roman solstice festivals warmed up."
Luke gives his readers a specific timetable for the events that take place during the Nativity. One must understand the Jewish context in order to correctly interpret them, however.
ReplyDeleteLuke 1:26 says that the angel Gabriel visited Mary in the 6th month. In the Jewish civil calendar of the time the New Year begins with Tishri or late September to late October. The 6th month is Adar or late February to late March. Nine months from Adar would be Tevet or late December to late January. This would place the Nativity exactly where Tradition places it.
Moreover, during the Annunciation Gabriel makes a point of saying that Elisabeth is in her 6th month of pregnancy in Luke 1:36. This would mean that Elisabeth conceived in the first month which would be Tishri or late September to late October. Zechariah, as a result, would have been priesting in the Temple during the Jewish High Holy Days when he was visited by Gabriel. A Jewish priest must remain celibate while serving in the Temple.
If Zechariah was priesting in the Temple during the High Holy Days, he would have saved this honor for when he was advanced in years because Jewish tradition teaches that God visited those who served in the Temple during this time and spoke with them. This great honor, which happens only once in a lifetime, would have been saved and prepared for one's entire priestly ministry.
Luke's Jewish audience would have immediately known the implications of the timetable. Once the Jewish context was lost, Gentile Christians would have only Tradition to guide them in correctly interpreting Luke's text.
Merry Christmas!
I think Gil has a more direct, less convoluted approach to determining that December is completely plausible as the month of Jesus' birth. One minor correction: six months after Sept/Oct is March/April, not Feb/March.
ReplyDeleteI think there are problems with Mr. Kemp's assertion that Jesus' baptism must have taken place in 29 A.D. Unless something new has come to light, the exact year is hard to determine because Luke mentions a census by Quirinius, and Quirinius didn't rule Judea during the appropriate time period; there are also other problems stemming from a mistake in the original calculation of year "0" (or year 1).