This is probably the clearest and most concise account of the discrepancies of the various biblical texts, placed in the context of known historical events. I guess one conclusion could be that, since he was born sometime between 6BC and AD6 we actually have the BC/AD line in the correct place :) Merry Christmas!
In his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) has a whole chapter devoted to how the Christian liturgy is tied to time and the four seasons. Christmas was celebrated on the winter solstice because it is the darkest day of the year, but hence forth the days get longer and lighter. Christians believe Christ is the light of the world dispelling the darkness, and bringing light to the world. This is similarly why the feast of the passion of John the Baptist is celebrated on June 24th near the summer solstice, in John 3:30, we read John the Baptist saying “He must increase, but I must decrease.” After the summer solstice the days get shorter, or decrease. The sun, associated with John the Baptist, now decreases and prepares the way for the coming of Christ at Christmas. It’s an idea that’s sadly been lost, but the Christian liturgy and liturgical seasons are highly tied to the four seasons and express the cosmic dimension of Christ’s death and resurrection. Thank you for your informative video and your great channel!
Romans could have been mithraists and that explains why winter solstice was so important to them. In ancient Iran and even today Yalda or Chelleh is celebrated on winter solstice.
That's why 21-25 December is called the birthday of the Sun, it has been celebrated in every Sun worshiping religion, while 21-25 June is called the day of Sun death. John of Patmos was an astrologer, that's why John's gospel and John's Book of Revelation have so many future sights, codes and astronomy, like the stars that told the Persians about Jesus' birth. That was so obvious, and that's why I consider it a gnosis gospel; since gnosis used to relate religion to astrology. Also, John's books used to describe the Son of God as a God himself, while the other gospels used to describe the Son of God close to the meaning of God's lover, just like the old testament. That's why the Romans worked so hard to put John's books in the Bible, because it is very similar to their religion.
@@Normal_user_coniven The story of the Magi is not in John's Gospel all. Nor is any Nativity story except for the statement that "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, as of the Only-Begotten of the Father."
You overlooked one major fact. Zacharias was of the order (course) of Abijah. In I Chronicles chapter 24 king David divided the priests into family groups (courses) and assigned to each of them the weeks in which they would officiate the temple services. The course of Abijah was served during early June and after serving his week of service Zacharias went home and Elizabeth conceived (most likely in late June). It is clearly stated that John the Baptist was 6 months older than Jesus. Since we can reasonably assume that John was born in the spring then it follows that Jesus would have been born 6 months later in the fall, probably in September.
You are correct Papa T. Jesus was most likely born on Feast of Tabernacles. When He would Tabernacle (dwell) with the people. Same time He will return for His Second Coming. The Lord's timing has nothing to do with the Gregorian calendar, but with The Feasts.
He definitely was not born December 25th. That was adopted from pagan winter solstice celebrations such as Saturnalia. So why did the Catholic church adopt this festival and does God aporove? The church did this to get pagans to join the chjrch to increase flock size. God does not approve of this,not does he approve of xmas
@@janellehouillon9067 I like to think he was born on the day of atonement because he came to atone for our sins but of course that’s just wishful thinking on my part. Your idea is also a pleasing one and just as likely to be correct.
@@geraldwalsh6489 I agree. Cain chose to worship God in his own way and it was rejected by God. Saul chose to worship God in his own way and it was rejected by God. The Priesthood of Jesus day chose to worship God in their own way and it was rejected by God. Why people think they can worship God in their own way is a mystery to me. I argued many times with my wife about this subject over how we raised our sons. It took me years to get through to her about it but eventually she began to teach it to her sisters. There was no way I could teach my children to believe in lies and then have to face God about it.
Hi Matt. I enjoyed your video a lot and it raised in me this question about my faith. I recently brought this discrepancy between Matthew and Luke to a biblical archeologist friend and I'm hoping you might consider the evidence he brought forth for me that was lacking in your video. The information that he shared with me is not readily available because it includes discoveries made within the last 20 years; it is nowhere listed on wiki or the first dozen google answers. So, Quirinius was "twice-governor" of Syria. He was governor of Syria when Herod was alive, and he was also governor at the time of that later date, 6ce. This has been mostly confirmed by the recent translations of ancient texts. You will notice in your video that you presented Luke 2:1, where Luke writes, "This was the *first* census" that was taken while Quirinius was governor. That implies that there was second, or more, censuses taken. In fact, wiki only lists "THE census of quirinius." In my research on the history of Michigan I discovered that this type of verbal confusion is common. For instance, there is a 1st and 2nd Treaty of Chicago that the US made with three native groups in the early 1820's; but the Second Treaty of Chicago is frequently referenced as "The Treaty of Chicago" because the other one is so often overlooked. I believe a similar situation is happening here. Luke writes that this census was taken "for all the roman world." The second census that Quirinius took was this 6ce one, which was, of course, for Judea only, as you pointed out -- but this simply gives evidence that this Judean census is the implied second census, not the full, first census. In addition: a census of all the roman world was an event that would have taken many years, as emissaries from Rome travelled on horseback throughout the Mediterranean. So to pin a census on a particular year is also difficult. All of this information puts the birth of Jesus at 7-5bce, from my understanding. Is any of this information useful? If you find time for a response I'd love to hear from ya. -John, in Michigan
I was wondering about the specifics of quirinius’s governorship. It makes sense that he would have served twice, because of how the senate appointed Governors (although I’m not sure if that was the same in Imperial Rome as in Republican Rome)
Adding the ordinate "first" to imply there were multiple following is _not_ the same as dropping the ordinate. That people drop the "second" from the name of the treaty only implies ignorance on their part that there was a first, which happens with the Geneva Conventions regarding the treatment of non-combatants, or conflation of the two, which happens with the Geneva Conventions, or that the second is of such overwhelming importance and newer thus more relevant, that it is obviously the one being discussed, as happens with the Geneva Conventions.
I agree Quirinius must have been governor twice - Luke was very specific to say the census was for the entire empire, not just Judea. And he was writing to an official of some standing in the empire to specifically give a historical account.
What you’ve said is on Wikipedia but it stipulates that this claim is made without evidence. Convenient that your friend can’t provide any actual evidence for his claims…
+ Romans 10:9-10 "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."
I actually really appreciate how you start by honestly saying there won't be a definitive answer and not save that conclusion to the end. This transparency is lacking on RUclips because channels want them views and retention rates. Now I have my expectations set and I'm still going to watch the entire thing.
The story I was told during my years at Catholic grammar school was: Dec. 25th was chosen as the day to celebrate Jesus’s birthday because it was also the day of celebration of the winter solstice. By adopting that date, the Church leaders hoped 1) to take advantage of the customary nature of solstice gatherings, and 2) to gradually supplant the solstice celebration with the so-called date of Jesus’s birth. I was never taught that the earliest Christians believed the 25th of December was actually Jesus’s birthday. I was also taught that the year of Jesus’s birth was unclear and probably fell somewhere between 4 BC and 7 AD. It appears the nuns’ teachings aligned fairly well with the facts in this video. Another thing to note: Luke, one of the Gospel authors mentioned in the video, was not an apostle and had never met Jesus. Matthew had been an apostle and knew Jesus for several years before the crucifixion. It’s likely that during the time span of Jesus’s ministry, he shared some stories of his early life with his followers. That might give more credence to Matthew’s version.
Exactly what we were taught at our catholic school. Also we were taught that Easter was the most important time to commemorate, the most important date in the Christian calendar. The birth of Jesus was important but his death and resurrection is what being Christian is all about.
"It appears the nuns’ teachings aligned fairly well with the facts in this video." Go back, look again. "terminus ante quem" (TAQ) "the point before which" is 4 BCE, meaning "no later than 4 BCE" (latest end date) "terminust post quem" (TPQ) "the point after which" is 6 CE, meaning "no earlier than 6 CE" (earliest start date) Absurdly, the 2 sources on Jesus' birth have the TAQ come BEFORE the TPQ. Either one is wrong, or the other, ...or they CAN be both wrong... but the only thing NOT possible is both being right.
I always thought there was a clue in the story of Jesus' family returning for the passover when he was 12 years old. When they finally find him after searching for three days, he explains how he must be about his father's business, as if his parents should have plainly realized this. "Know ye not that I must be about my father's business?" Therefore, I posit that he was indeed born during the passover (the paschal lamb) and had a birthday while they were there, making him 13, or the age at which Jewish tradition holds that a boy has become a man. From this story we also see that it was sort of common for families to travel to their home town for the passover, which might have been why Augustus chose that time to take the census. It was convenient. If this is true, Christ also would have died just about the time of his birthday, the sacrificial lamb, born during the passover and sacrificed during the pass over. Possibly, the day he rose from the dead was his actual birthday. So that would be pretty cool.
@@assievanderwesthuizen6314 There's never been a census requiring people to go to an ancestral home. The myths of the origins of Yeshua are absurd. People enjoy believing nonsense and the more ridiculous the better. A global flood! Animals on a ship together! A magic beanstalk! Surviving being swallowed by a whale! A talking serpent!
What you should think about is that nobody bothered to record anything about what this child prodigy did for the following eighteen years before he started his career as an apocalyptic cult leader.
Even though a lot of recorded history turns out to be an estimate, it still soothes my mind to at least have a general idea of when we are talking about. Thanks for this great explanation!
Yeah when it comes to dates that long ago, exact years (while nice to know chronologically) are not that important as life remained pretty much the same in scales that small. Whether it was 4 BCE or 6 CE we can imagine that time period and know there was a King who was vassal to Augustus
Would really cool to see some progression on this by following up about the “star”. What was going on it the sky through that general window of time? Comets, Supernova etc
don't trust your mind, you're clearly delusional. see a dr. they have great medication for ppl that believe in in myths and have imaginary friends.. ppl of that ilk are an embarrassment to humanity and to evolution, congratulations.
Luke 3:23 says Jesus was "about 30 years of age" when he began his ministry, and John mentions Jesus attending at least three yearly Passover feasts, meaning that Jesus' ministry lasted about three years and that he was about 33-years-old when he died. If Jesus was born during 6 CE (implied by Luke), that means Jesus died during 39 CE, three years after the governorship of Pontius Pilate ended. If Jesus was born between 6 and 4 BCE (implied by Matthew), that means Jesus died between 27 and 29 CE, which fits into Pontius Pilate's governorship. However, Luke 3:1-3 says John the Baptist's ministry started "in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar", which would be 29 CE. Jesus didn't start his ministry until after John the Baptist started his, so this would mean that Jesus began his ministry and died in the same year (29 CE) if we're going by Matthew's birth narrative. This would also mean that Jesus was about 33 when his ministry began and that his ministry lasted less than a year, contradicting the length of time that Jesus' ministry lasted in John's gospel. If we just look at Luke's narrative and ignore every other gospel, then Jesus was born in 6 CE, John the Baptist started his ministry in 29 CE, and Jesus started his own ministry seven years later in 36 CE when he was about 30. 36 CE was also the last year Pontius Pilate was governor, so again this leaves no wiggle room for Jesus' ministry to last longer than one year.
Alright, so what about the word "about" do you not understand? It's also worth noting that only Luke claims he was "about 30 years of age" meaning that you can only apply that logic to the Gospel of Luke and not to any of the other gospels, since they have their own chronology.
@@BurnBird1 and yet according to christians: A) the four canonical gospels are all totally infallible B) the four canonical gospels all agree with each other, ie there are no discrepancies across the gospels. The gospels are either hard fact, as christians claim, meaning they can all be reconciled, or else they are fictional, and made up many years after any germ of a fact, as evidence suggests. GLuke even admits this outright in the introduction if you read it (though creative translation sometimes has GLuke claiming to be a witness to the events described, this is not possible, due to the fact of it being written in AD80 at the earliest. A more proper translation of the Greek would be "the things we believe" rather than "the things we witnessed". It's surprising how much of this stuff is right there in the bible, covered up by creative translation efforts).
@@CalumCarlyle No, you can't just make up two extremes like that. The gospel accounts don't have to be either "hard fact" or else "fictional" There's middle ground there, as well as different parts of the gospels falling on different levels on the spectrum. The birth narratives for example, considering how ahistorical they are and that both authors don't agree and have theological reasoning behind how they construct them, can therefore be concluded to be almost entirely fictional. Other parts of the gospels however, such as the fact that Jesus was crucified, is agreed upon by all the gospels, as well as extra-biblical sources, so we can therefore assume with some certainty that it probably did happen. The gospels are *very* biased documents, but just because they are biased doesn't mean that we can't gleam some truths from it, especially when we contrast it with less biased sources.
Funny thing is, 1AD would be roughly the mean average between the two different dates given by the Gospels. So you could argue that it's a good compromise between the two discrepancies.
That is a good compromise, although to be honest I would be more inclined to believe the book of Matthew over the book of Luke, since Matthew himself lived during Jesus’s time while Luke lived well after the fact.
@@ashenwolf98 As far as I know the gospels are anonymous snd the naming is just church tradition so we don't know if the author (or authors of) of Matthew (or the others) were ever even close to have met Jesus.
Well the Anno Domini dating system was made by Dionysius the Humble, a 6th century monk. So you have to realize the Gospels and (maybe) a general idea of Roman history is all he had to go off of. I say he got pretty darn close in his guesstimate.
Great vid! As a Christian, specific dates such as Jesus’s birth aren’t important (I celebrate Christmas according to the Julian Calendar, which falls on January 7). Rather, the message of giving, loving your neighbor, and celebrating Jesus is much more important. I wish everyone the best during this holiday season, God bless!
The Christmas of today I do not celebrate as the day of Christ’s birth but its internal message of family, kinship and coming together to enjoy life is more important to my self than knowing when Jesus was born, though it would be a nice detail to have.
@@zakh-g4893 + Romans 10:9-10 "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."
As someone living near Bethlehem, it's FREEZING in December. It's not European, but I suppose -3°C on an average night is not a great sleeping temperature.
Although the Roman warm period has the average temperature of the earth at that time as 1-2C warmer than today with some regions up to 4-6C warmer during winter.
Jesus was crucified in the Spring, and was 33 1/2 years old, when he was crucified. This would put his Birth in, quite possibly, Late September, possibly between the 25th-30th. There's a lot of difference and controversy concerning when he was born, and when he died, but one thing I'll say about the whole thing -I'm glad that, after 3 days and 3 nights, he arose from the dead, and came out of the Tomb, victorious over death, hell, and the grave! He is the possessor of the keys of death and hell, and he lives forevermore!
@@JohnStark72 Seems like that would work, too. He certainly wasn't born in December. There's no way that that could be right. If Jesus was 33 1/2 when he was Crucified, and had been born in December, then he wouldn't have been Crucified until mid to late June. The math on the December birth doesn't work. I'm sticking with possibly sometime in September, as the Month in which Jesus was born.
Good video. But you missed a critical part of the puzzle on His birth. The priestly order Zechariah belongs to, actually matters because his order only served in the Temple in Feb, Mar, Apr, Aug, Sep, and Oct. This matters because he impregnated Elizabeth right after his service in the temple. Add to that, Elizabeth was six months pregnant by the time Mary came to visit, it becomes easier to lock down 6 possible months during the year. Also, the sheep argument is not irrelevant. How they bred their flocks is a tradition followed to this day. In Bethlehem, they introduce rams to the ewes at a certain time of year, so that they birth between November and March. That matters. Add to that, the shepherds only stayed out at night during that season in order to ensure the lambs were dried off properly during the cold nights. After March, they do not stay out.
Hello my brother - would you kindly let me have your email so I could get in touch with you, or a twitter/skype account? You've made some excellent points and if you could spare me a little time, I'd like to learn.
So, in about 1980 or so I saw a presentation at our local planetarium that talked among other things about the birth of Jesus. They theorized that the Maji would have been reacting to an astronomical portent. The idea in this case was that one or more scientists had run a simulation of the motions of the solar system and found a conjunction of three planets which occurred in the spring of 6 BC. This is something the Maji, who were also the royal astronomers among other things, would have taken as extremely significant. The planetarium had one of 12 sophisticated Ziess sky projectors in the US that worked with complicated gearing to project the actual night sky with a high level of accuracy. They ran the planetary motion part of their projector back to 6 BC and sure enough there was the same conjunction. The theory was that this significant astronomical event might have convinced the Wise Men that something was up in the spring of 6 BC and that this planetary conjunction was the “star” they had followed.
Brad, now that you mention this, I too recall seeing this at the planetarium in the Denver Museum of Nature & Science in the early to mid 1980’s. Although viewed as less scientific, it would be interesting to see what a good vedic astrologer would say if they calculated charts to the same period. The other interesting thing is who where the Maji? Did they come via the Silk Road? Where they from India, Persia, China, Mongolia, etc? The more more we know about history, yet more that knowledge unfolds - it’s really marvelous, isn’t it?
But as Matt says in the video, I don't think the verse specifically says that the magi were there for the birth. They just came to visit some unspecified time after.
The issue with this, is using the same knowledge of stars we have now, a visible pulsar was known to have existed around 4bce, so whilst interesting, neither force the answer to be settled.
In Hebrew Sunday school we always talked about history. I always thought they were saying "before the common error." It wasn't until my late 20s that I learned it was "era" not "error."
The service of Zechariah is a good place to start. His tour of duty in the Temple and the announcement of the conception of his son John gives us a very good estimation of when John the Baptizer was born. Zechariah was relieved of duty by the end of June which means he was home and impregnating his wife by July. Therefore John would have been born in the spring. He was six months older than his cousin Jesus which laces the birth of Jesus in the fall. The clue of the day is in the Gospel according to John when he states the Lord tabernacled among us. The feast of Tabernacles is the 15th of Tishri.
Other posters have made similar comments as yours which are far more credible than the video suggests. I'm surprised at his lack of deeper research into the matter from this perspective. Best wishes.
@@PageMarker1 The source is a scholarly paper that reviewed the entire birth narrative and the surrounding events. I found the part discussing the year in the video informative but the discussion of the actual day seemed to cater to modern scholars and not the people who actually witnessed the evernts and left written and oral accounts. Modern scholars discount thise sources. What is amazing is that I know people who are descendants of the family group that Jesus was born into.
@@cpk2GIRL I know a family that is descended from Jesus' extended family. They keep their lineage in mind from generation to generation. Their ancestor was a second cousin to Jesus. They are Orthodox Christians, Hebrews by descent but today they are called Palestinians.
ZacharYa'oh (Zechariah) is a fictional character along with Alay-Shabai (Elizabeth) created by Luke and his fellow gospel writers. There is no mention, nor any records given, including by Josephus to substantiate the existence of this person. Conversely, according to the prophets and Ya'ohshai himself, Ya'ohkhanan the immerser (John the Baptist) was none other than the prophet Al-Ya'oh (Elijah) who did not see death until his head was severed by Herod Antipas. So the whole story of his birth, and kinship to Ya'ohshai was to legitimize Ya'ohshai (now called Iesous by the Herodian Edomite Pharisee Paul) as High Priest as well as Savior. The problem is, only one from the tribe of Loay (Levi) and specifically the sons of Ahran (Aaron) through Tsadok (Zadok) can be High Priest. That is why the Maccabees were illegitimate in their claims to the position. And according to YashaiYa'oh (Isaiah) 43:11, only YA'OH (YHWH) Himself is Savior. Ya'ohshai (Jesus) is the Mashaykh (Messiah), but that just means he was anointed to perform the specific task of gathering the flocks of Ya'ohsharal (Israel) and returning them back to the covenant and true worship of YA'OH. Shalom.
Very enlightening video and I enjoyed it as well. You have a unique way of giving us the facts in an engaging way. Thank you for all of the work you put into it!
Considering the the Gospel of Luke was written in a time when the old people of the time would still remember the census, is it really reasonable to accept that he would've gotten such an important detail wrong? Aren't we committing the fallacy of "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"? Perhaps there was an earlier censes under Herod, and since the census was taken when Judea was an independent kingdom, it was not as controversial as the later census that was done for tax purposes? According to the gospel of Luke, there doesn't seem to be any controversy surrounding this census and people seems to have been very compliant, making it much less controversial and historically noteworthy than the later census? Also, perhaps the reason why Joseph and Mary went down to Bethlehem is because he actually came from that town? He was visiting his fiancé, and when the news came, they moved down to Bethlehem because they assumed they would live there after the marriage. However, with the change of the political tides in Judea, he might have chosen to move the Galilee instead and raise the child in the town of his mother instead? Many details in the New Testament that secular historians simply threw away and scoffed at was later proven accurate with new archeological discoveries. Since Luke lived a lot closer to the actual events than the secular historians of today, perhaps a more cautious answer of: "we don't have enough data" is a more prudent course of action than to just assume a historical error in the text?
For many cultures around the world, esp. at a time when 1/3 to 1/2 of all children died in their infant years, the actual date of birth was _not_ important. And in many cases, not even the exact year. Sure, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But as far as we know, Quirinius became governor of Syria in 6 CE, 10 years after Herod's death. Just postulating a different census under Herod, in direct contradiction to Luke's words, isn't good scholarship either. If we acknowledge that Luke got something wrong, assuming he mixed up the two Herods and thought the census had taken place after the death of Herod the Great, instead of Herod Archelaus, is quite a bit more likely. (Also, _no_ census was popular in Judaea, regardless of reason.) According to Luke, Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem because of the census (which is a dubious assertion in itself). We can think of a lot of other reasons why someone would travel that way, but that's not what the source says. If we disregard the source, we're basically left with no other clue, so "we don't know" is the honest answer, yes. But that answer already assumes an error in the text.
@@varana I have done some more reading on the matter. One article is making the important distinction that Luke is not saying he was _governor_ in Syria, rather that he was _governing_ in Syria. It is also known that he was conducting military action against the Homonadensians in Syria between 12BC and 2AD, so it is safe to say that he was holding some kind of high office before becoming governor in 6 AD. We know the previous governor, Lucius Volusius Saturninus, only goverend for two years, so perhaps Luke opted to mention the more recognisable name instead. One theory, though quite speculative, hold that he might have been governor of Syria twice. The precedent for this theory is a tumbstone refering to a person being governor twice in Syria, but it is very fragmentory. Also, the claim that Joseph traveled to Bethlehem for the sensus doea not seem to be that dubious after all: Early in the twentieth century, a papyrus was discovered which contained an edict by G. Vibius Maximus, the Roman governor of Egypt, stating: Since the enrollment by households is approaching, it is necessary to command all who for any reason are out of their own district to return to their own home, in order to perform the usual business of the taxation. (Cobern, C.M. 1929. The New Archeological Discoveries and their Bearing upon the New Testament. New York and London: Funk & Wagnalls, p. 47; Unger, M.F. 1962. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, p. 64).
@@Hannodb1961 But mentioning the more memorable name is the issue. To a reader familiar with Jewish history, "the census when Quirinius was governing Syria" points to a very specific and famous date: 6 CE (or shortly after), the census after the death of Herod Archelaus, which led to a substantial revolt with long-lasting effects in Judaea. And assuming that Luke mentions a person who was not governor of Syria as governing Syria seems already a contradiction to me. Quirinius held some form of office (either directly governor of Galatia, or at least military command) in Asia Minor in 5-3 BCE, and he later was councilor to Augustus' son Gaius. That he held important offices during that time, is not in doubt. That papyrus refers to people having their home in town A but staying in town B at the moment, for whatever reason. It does not mean that people would have to go to the home city of some distant ancestor (which one?), like Joseph. Luke says that he had to go to Bethlehem because he descended from David. That's a fundamentally different thing.
@@varana Not necesarilly. I'm not sure how much of the political details is known in Syria, but it is concievable that such details could explain why it would make more sense to mention the more well known person. For instance, about 10 years ago in my country, we had a political incident that lead to an interim president ruling for about 6 months. I bet most people have forgotten about that today, and in their mind, the next president succeeded the prior president directly. If people had to recall an event that took place during the rule of the interim president, they'd probably name the wrong president. Same with the soviet Union. I know there was two secratary generals between Breznev and Gorbachev, but since their rule was so short and inconsequential, I dont even bother to remember their names. Now, we know the previous governer only ruled for two years. Why? Was he just a temporary appointment? Did he not hold the real power? I dont know. But based on the experience of our country's recent history, it does make sense to me that there could've been reasons why Luke decided to name the more famous person rather than the actual governor of the time. Regarding Joseph, the Bible really doesnt give much information about him, but there is reason to believe that he actually grew up in Bethlehem, and that Mary lived in Nazareth. They probably met in Jerusalem during passover or some other feast. The reason why I say so is because in the Mathew account, we find Jesus in Bethlehem again, even though this took place 2 years after his birth. So clearly, Joseph must have had familial ties in Bethlehem. The exact details is uncertain, but the papirus from Egypt does give us little reason to doubt that Joseph had good reason to travel to Bethlehem for the census.
@@Hannodb1961 It seems that you are trying really hard to harmonize Mathew and Luke. Is it possible that the writers of Mathew and Luke are just mistaken?
The problem with BCE and CE is that they are even less meaningful than the traditional BC/AD (despite the discrepancies). I mean what makes the common era "common"? How is that distinct from the time before it? Just my thoughts.
Sui generis because because that dating system is commonly used. You can compare it to moving away from defining the kilogram or meter by it's physical prototype towards aformula based on physical constants. Those units are and were in that sense always arbitrary. And if BC and AD are not what they describe to be it does make sense to face the fact that the dating system is arbitrary, like with SI-Units we find formulas with physical constants that mimic the definition of the previous standard of unit for convenience.
My problem with BCE/CE system is that the 2 acronyms are too similar to each other and they can be confused for each other. BC/AD are completely different and not confusable with the 2 acronyms. Also the common misconception is that BCE/CE is to remove Christianity from the calander even though the calender IS a Christian Calender. It's literally called the "Gregorian Calender". Which is named after Pope Gregory who modified the Julian Calender to fix the lip year problem.
@@modmaker7617 i got used to it pretty quickly. The only thing that throws me of occasionally is BC because my first inclination is to expect the following E 😅 That being said, i thought it is partially about religion. BC by itself would be fine, but with AD you principally force even non christians to call a figure Lord (Domini) even though it doesn't apply to them.
i'm still waiting for the scientific community to updating the naming of taxonomic ranking system of species / genus / family / order / class / phylum / etc.. if anything needs a nomenclature overhaul, it's that old headache-inducing system =_=
Just like Kelvin is the only sane temperature scale, the only sane date scale would start at big bang. But that would be even less practical than using Kelvin in everyday life, so all the world's calendar systems use an arbitrary zero. The Jews called it "creation of the world", the Christians "birth of Jesus". Anyway, absolute zero temperature is quite exactly known nowadays. Big bang is not, and besides the difficulties of handling unwieldy huge numbers, a calendar whose zero might be a few million years earlier or later isn't very practical.
What a great piece! After strong evidences, all of which ended with "no one really knows". I am a Catholic, by the way. Of course, I observe Christmas. But, it is also great to notice Jewish and Muslim holidays because they occur during important dates on how the sun and moon move.
@@maganhassan2627 , as an example, during the month of Ramadan, Muslims are obliged to go on fasting from the sunrise, will remain the whole day, and will end at sunset. The start of each month in Muslim Calendar is always begin, literally, during the first sightings of the tiny uncovered part of the moon, immediately after the "New Moon" phase.
So glad a new bible/religion came out, it's the most interesting series you've made, you always put so much effort in providing us with correct cultural content
I was born and raised in Israel, I can confirm that winters in that area are mild, though beit lechem is quite high, so can get very cold at times, but also very hot, but it's more comfortable than summer where it's always way too hot
@@Nunya_Bidness_53 the fields only start to properly grow in September, Israeli winters are the time of year when everything comes back to life, animals go to hibernation through the summer there, cause it's so hot and dry
Pleasantly surprised by the evenhanded treatment of the subject matter. Also remarkable for comprehensive scope. Thanks! For as many people mindlessly parrot the nonexistence of Quirinius and the absence of a Roman census it’s gratifying to see that the established Roman history can be understood and correlated to the events in question by a relatively disinterested party examining the internal chronology of the source texts.
At first I have to say that I love every single video on this channel. My only problem with your work is that I can’t find the sources of your videos. Maybe this is something only germans do (I am german an watch also a lot german history content on this platform), but I love to look at the sources. This gives me the chance to dive deeper into history and to work with the knowledge. It also solidifies your statements.
There are dozens of books written about the historicity of Jesus. You can just pick one up from your library. The New Testament has multiple references to historical events and persons. What you are looking for are the stone inscriptions and Roman records that reference the same events and people. Historians take the pagan sources and their dates and compare them to the New Testament, which gives a range of dates for the references in the New Testament. Pontius Pilate, for instance, had numerous references in both inscriptions and records. So, the New Testament account of the execution of Jesus during his governorship means that it would have to have happened during the years he was governor according to these independent records. The same is true for references to king Herod at the birth or young age of Jesus, and the Roman census of Judea. There are independent records of the dates of Herod's reign and when the Judean census was conducted.
@@legisnuntius Thank you very much for the information. But to be honest, my question was not only directed at this video, but all videos on the channel. I am used to the sources being linked or at least mentioned in the description so that everyone can understand where the creators got their information from.
Always check everything you hear or read....never take what you hear as being fact. One thing I learnt as I started my journey with the Lord and I have found it the best advice I ever received. There are too many opinions out there with no scriptures to back them up Shalom
Merry Chrismas Matt. I found this channel only recently and have found these charts and videos so interesting. I even made my own family tree on Ancestry and managed to trace my details back to the middle ages thanks to these videos. Yes I had to pause them and transfer all the names. Such an interesting subject.
Matt, I love your sheep characters. I love Serta's sheep and love seeing them other places. Merry Christmas and/or Happy Hanukkah to you and your family.
I always find your work so insightful and informative, thank you for that. Forgive me if you've covered this before, but I would love to see a video explaining the history of the worlds calendars and perhaps how we got to the Gregorian calendar today over other calendars still used throughout the world
It's basically a result of Europe being the first to colonize and thereby have influential power over the world. AD was just am alternative to the Roman system used that dated back to Christ instead of a certain emperor of Rome. Charlemagne being the first Holy Roman Emperor used the dating system, and those who came after him kept with the tradition. By the time of the Age of Exploration (Columbus, Magellan, etc.) it was the standard, so it spread over the world. The Gregorian system was just a fix for the calendar, because the Julian calendar was based on a year being 365.25 days, but the Gregorian calendar more accurately sets a year as 365.2425 days. Currently, I think a leap day needs to be skipped in the year 3000 or 4000 to keep the solstices from shifting dates over time, but the current calendar essentially doesn't change for many, many generations; whereas, under the Julian Calendar the solstices and equinoxes changed a day every four hundred years.
@@litigioussociety4249 The essence of the redating was the need to clarify the timeline of history, as Bishop Ussher's biblical dating had become untenable given the breakthroughs on cosmology and geology. For many years, that stopped at the Gregorian 11 days correction, with a degree of uncertainty recognised in the idea of "The Dark Ages" as late as the 1960s, which has now been dispelled. One very useful text, developing on the Deas Sea Scrolls data suggesting Essene roots, is Peter Cresswell's Jesus the Terrorist, connecting his circle to the Sicarii. That the Vatican suppressed the data for so long is utterly offensive to historians, and we're still far from solid on the cultural impact thirty years down the road as a result. We've seen a similar clarification of the Pharaonic Chronology as well in the last 50 years.
It would be interesting, though, to see how the Gregorian calendar compares to some others in use, e.g. the Jewish calendar and that used in Nepal. If you know of any in which a week is a unit of something other than 7 days, even better!
@@leaaugusta9924 You're dealing with sight irregularities in the moon's orbit of the earth, defining the month, and the earth's orbit of the sun, defining the year, and it's own rotation, defining the day. The proportion of approximately 365.25 days, adjusting the length of the hour slightly homes in on that, so with the leap year system as a further adjustment, you're dealing with factors of 365, which are 5 and 73. One is slightly too short, the other far too long, and so the irregular month lengths became arbitrarily established. The Mayan calendar, on the other hand, used a 20-day month, with 5 extra days interpolated.
Good video. You probably are aware there was an error in your calendar graphics. Your graphic said "Spring Solstice" while you were correctly saying "Spring Equinox." Not a big deal just letting you know.
Christian here, if you wonder about what date (Matthew or Luke) to pick, please remember that Matthew was a Tax Collector, while Luke was a doctor (one of his jobs was being a historian) so he had to be as accurate as possible with the dates and events he narrated. Seeing some comments, I'll also add that Luke was the only one trying to write with a clear chronological order (since he was writing to a very important authority called "Teohpilus") while the others weren't focused on that, especially John.
@Nehemiah Scudder What evidence we have that the Gospel of Luke was plagiarized from Joseph?? It is true that Luke was no eyewitness, but he got his information from the eyewitnesses of Jesus. The problem with your statement is that you claim to Joseph wrote his book around 93 AD, But Scholars suggest that the Gospel of Luke was written around 85 AD. So something is off with your information.
My biggest concern is that Rome has no documentation to say it ever required return to home towns for census, as is now, census is based on where you live, no questions. There is the possibility that Joeseph was working 'illegally' and not declaring that he and his partner where working away from his declared address, but this would be unlikely and add more questions than it answers. Both Matthew and Luke say they travelled to Bethlehem, so technically the information they do give that can't be verified could be assumed to be questionable.
I talked with some Atheists online and we came to an interesting Result: Atheists dont have this 'inherent desire to spread their word', which of course is UNDERSTANDABLE buuut it also has negative side-effects, evidend by Atheist-Channel generally being smaller than Theist-channel. So i think we should all self-reflect and ask us if Atheists shouldnt recommend-each-other more often stuff.
@@slevinchannel7589 I am not an atheist. I self-describe as an agnostic panendeist. That said, I believe in an honest pursuit of truth and try to remain as open minded as possible. I also believe we get closer to truth by eliminating that which does not belong. Truth has nothing to fear from investigation.
Thank you Matt for such a great informative video. This is the first video I've ever watched on your channel and I can say it really enriched me a lot. Furthermore, I'm so pleased everyone in the comments section is so polite. It's been two days since Christmas but nonetheless, I want to wish everyone a merry Christmas. God bless you all!!! ✝️✝️✝️🙌🙌🙌
christians already has the tradition of december 25 decades before the romans began celebrating saturnalia. Hypolitus of Rome wrote about it in around 204 AD. The roman emperor declared the celebration 70 yrs later.
I went in here knowing historical contexts from various other videos stating the same dates and events mentioned also in this video. I'm glad you simplified everything. Although it was inconclusive, it sort of clarified when the possible date and time of year it may have happened. It's not out of curiosity, the algorithm led me far into a rabbit hole of related videos and I just wanted to see where it went.
I talked with some Atheists online and we came to an interesting Result: Atheists dont have this 'inherent desire to spread their word', which of course is UNDERSTANDABLE buuut it also has negative side-effects, evidend by Atheist-Channel generally being smaller than Theist-channel. So i think we should all self-reflect and ask us if Atheists shouldnt recommend-each-other more often stuff. So i offer here and now some promised-to-be-good Atheist-RUclipsr, and on that note, also Science-Channel.
I have always loved Bible History, and discussions. I grew up in the Golden Age of Sunday School, my Mom was Sunday School Superintendent, I attended every Sunday all through grade school, and taught it when I was older. I tried to incorporate history, like Josephas' writings into the lessons and most of the kids loved it.
I talked with some Atheists online and we came to an interesting Result: Atheists dont have this 'inherent desire to spread their word', which of course is UNDERSTANDABLE buuut it also has negative side-effects, evidend by Atheist-Channel generally being smaller than Theist-channel. So i think we should all self-reflect and ask us if Atheists shouldnt recommend-each-other more often stuff. So i offer here and now some promised-to-be-good Atheist-RUclipsr, and on that note, also Science-Channel.
“‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.
When I was in Sunday school I asked my teacher if they are lying to us about Santa in order to get us to be good are they also lying to us about Jesus and God for the same reasons needless to say it did not go over well.
Gee you have had an exciting life, how many kids would do anything to be allowed to attend Sunday school where some demented adult could push religion down their throats? this is where you initially learn about guilt, shame, paranoia, unworthiness and the penalty of being burned forevever for minor misdemeanors against the invisible Skydaddy with super powers.
In Daniel 9:20-27 is the 70-week prophecy. Vs 24: 70 weeks are determined for your people (70 weeks × 7 days a week = 490 days/years in Bible prophecy). Vs 25: know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem (457 BCE decree to rebuild Jerusalem found in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah). Until Messiah the Prince, there shall be 7 weeks and 62 weeks (69 weeks, 483 years the Messiah is annointed). From 457 BCE to 27 CE is 483 years. 27 CE Jesus was baptized and annointed by the Holy Spirit, and Jesus started His ministry. Vs 26: After the 62 weeks, Messiah shall be cut off but not for Himself, and vs 27: He shall confirm a covenant with many for one week (7 years) but in the middle of the week (3 1/2 years) He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. 31 CE Jesus was crucified, and the veil was torn from top to bottom, putting an end to sacrifice and offering (end of the first 3 1/2 years). Last 3 1/2 years end in 34 CE with the stoning of Stephen in Acts 7:54-60, which mirrors the death of Jesus in Luke 23:34-49. If God wanted us to know the exact birth of Jesus, I believe it would be in the Scriptures, but I do believe Jesus was born in 4 BCE and His first birthday was in 3 BCE and in 27 CE He was annointed which He would have been 30 years of age. I know that this is not in the Bible, but I enjoyed comparing Bible history with the history shared in this video.
There’s a theory that he was born in September, can’t remember how that came about. There was also a documentary that said there was a comet that was visible from Judaea at the time of his birth.
I think it was estimated on the dates Zacariah was in the temple that the angel informed him that his wife elizabeth will get pregnant, the time Mary visited Elizabeth who was 6 months pregnant ant that time. If Christ was born in September, then he must be conceived in December, that is 9 months before. Early Christians do not celebrate birthdays as the day one is born, but will celebrate the conception, like the feast on immaculate conception. .just tsken from a presentation. .
Small fact check/extra information on the Passover reference at the end: I understand that it's a graphic for easy reference, but for anyone that doesn't know, Passover is 8 days long and doesn't correspond to a specific day on the Gregorian calendar.
Consider not only the sheep, consider also the census during that time (Luk.2:2). No one in the right sense will do this in winter. Also you can estimate the Birth Month of Lord Jesus Christ, by computing the time when he was born, by considering the birth also of John the Baptist, and when Zechariah father of John the Baptist when he Zechariah was serving at temple (Luk.1:22-24). You can count the month when was Lord Jesus Christ was born.
Jesus Was Born in Zero BC Using God Original CalendarBy Pastor Clarence Boykin, Jr.I am going to end the never-ending debate about when Jesus Christ was born.The scriptures said, prove everything in the mouth of 2 witnesses or 3 witnesses. There are 3 fiscal beginning calendar dates for the birth of Jesus Christ, each with their own Before Christ date (BC). St. Bede book entitled Ecclesiastical History of the English People was the first to use the term BC, and the AUC calendar, and the Anno Domini calendar (AD) together. In Chapter 2 he states, "Britain has never been visited by the Romans, and was, indeed, entirely unknown to them before the time of Caius Julius Caesar, who, in the year 693 after the building of Rome, (also known as ab urbe condita calendar AUC), but the sixtieth year before the incarnation of our Lord." Notice that there are no named days, months, dates, and season. From St. Bede perspective, the birth of Jesus Christ was common knowledge to those who was alive at the writing of his book. They knew from Sunday March 1, was in the year 693 AUC, but 60 years before the incarnation of our Lord was on Tuesday February 1, 693 AUC, and 60 years later Jesus Christ was born on Sunday February 1, 753 AUC and Sunday February 1, AD is 0 BC. Then St. Bede died on Monday October 26, AD 735 years later. Let’s go to the first calendar, God Original Calendar (GOC) come from the scriptures starting at Genesis 1:1. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:1-5 The first day was Sunday January 1, GOC and 3,642 years 1 months BC.Then Jesus Christ would be born on Sunday February 1, 3642 GOC. This is 0 BC and Sunday February 1, AD.Let’s go to the second calendar, After Israel come out of the land of Egypt (AEC) come from Exodus 12:1.And the Lord spoke unto Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt saying, This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you. Exodus 12:1God spoke to them on Saturday April 1, 2668 GOC and this became, Saturday April 1, AEC, and 973 years 10 months BC. Then, Jesus Christ was born on Sunday February 1, 973 AEC. This is 0 BC and Sunday February 1, AD.Get my book and learn much more!
Very interesting to see text analysis - additionally, if I remember correctly, one of my "explaining legends and myths" books said that there was also an analysis of what could have been the star of Bethlehem, and one version was a visible supernova in 4BCE.
Apparently the ancients believed that the birth of great men was marked by exceptional events. Most probably the star is just a literary embellishment.
@@pansepot1490 perhaps the star event could have happened - just not necessarily at the exact year. I mean, when were the gospels written, 50+ years after? Think back a decade or so even now, you can probably easily remember something happening, for example, a solar eclipse, but exact year might have fallen out of memory.
Doing Bible study with a messianic Jew and he said that was around the end of September. Possible on the feast of Sukkot because every Jewish feasts of Jewish are related to Jesus ❤️
Would that include Hannukah as a Jewish feast? A feast regarding the freeing of Jerusalem and the Temple a feast similar to Sukkot, Hannukah which begins on the 25th day repeat 25th day you know 25th day of Chislev 25th day where have I heard 25th day before what day is Christmas oh yeah thats right 25th. Eight days later presentation in the Temple. Meanwhile Hannukah festival of lights and John 1 presents the very fact that light has come into the world. If you were to take Hannukah 25th day of the ninth month and transpose that into the Julian calendar you would not choose the ninth month of the Julian calendar you would choose the month most closest to Chislev. That would be December. So here we are Hannukah beginning on the 25h day of Chislev roughly our December and Jesus was born on the 25th. Then the fact that in Egypt prior to 300AD they were celebrating the birth of Jesus the Christ according to their calendar system, they celebrated in roughly our March. The thing with this is that they the Egyptian celebrated the birth of Jesus Christ in the 25th day of the 9th month of their calendar. Facts Jesus Christ was not born in the Julian calendar he was born in the Jewish calendar. 25th day 9th month. Transferred to the December 25th in the Julian Calendar and transferred into the Egyptian calendar prior to 300AD as their 25th day of the 9th month.
Shalom all, I'd like to add more to this discussion that may shine another element of historical light on this crucial point. I read each comment and did not see anyone point out that the "Jewish" calendar (Nisan- Adar) is a mathematical invention and not "YaHoVahs" calendar. Exodus 12:2 & Deu. 16:1 let us know that YaHoVah has a calendar that was established in Gen 1:14 that He reminds us to "guard." The talmud lets us know that the last act of the Sanhedrin in the year 359 CE Hillel 2nd instituted the calculated "Jewish" calendar before disbanding into the diaspora, as to keep Jews all over the world on the same calendar. So yes @user-sn3gr9zi7j messianic friend is correct about Sukkot. Josephus 17:167 tells us Herod had 2 rabbis burned alive on Jan 10, 1 BCE and was less than a month after the order to kill all male circumcised children in Bethlehem. Herod had Antipater executed and leaves his son Archelaus to rule Judea and Herod dies 5 days after Antipater. Archelaus mourns Herod's death 7 days and then slaughters 3000 Pharaisees on the Temple mount of which he's called to Rome for said actions. A rebellion resulted in Judaea which General Varus is called from Syria to Judaea to quash. These facts let us know that Herod called for the killing of the children in Bethlehem 2 years old or younger "according to the time he diligently inquired of the magi." Matt 2:16. So "the great sign in the heavens" had to have appeared 1-2 years before the execution of the children in Bethlehem, hence Yeshua had to of been born in the year 3-2 BCE 1-2 years before Herod's death. There is not another lunar eclipse in a 10 year time frame that fits all biblical, Roman and astronomical records. Lk 3:23 confirms "Yeshua nearing but not yet having reached 30 years of age." All this to say Yeshua was born on the 15th day of the 7th month, the High Sabbath of Sukkot, Thursday, Sep. 26th, 3 BCE. John 1:14 & Lk 2:7-20. Subsequently circumcised 22nd Day of the 7th month, Thursday Oct 3, 3 BCE Lk 2:21. Now knowing this we can calculate His death on Passover 14th Day of 1st month (Aviv) Wednesday, April 28, 28 CE and resurrection 3 days & 3 nights later Matt 12:40, before sunset on the weekly Sabbath 17th Day of Aviv, May 1, 28 CE. Of course all of these dates correspond exactly with the timing given in Lev 23 as well as other corresponding scriptures....and what else should we expect from our perfect Creator??? Precise precision and nothing else. I pray this helps clear up any confusion. Additionally this chronology also gives us precise understanding of Daniel ch 9 as well. Shalom Brent
Thank you. What about the way he’s represented as a fair man. When biblically he’s described otherwise? This is something that’s vexed my spirit more so in recent times.
I absolutely went through school being told that AD meant after death and it never sat well with me simply because nobody had a definitive date but somehow had definitive dates for BC, before Christ lol, as they said 🙄
BC events being well-documented I guess it also doesn’t help our man never got married, had children, nor owned property Those leave records of your existence What an elusive dude
Jesus was walking along the path when HE was asked “how old are you” Jesus said well on MY Mother’s side I’m 30 years old but on MY FATHER’s side I AM. (Eternal) The ancient of days! 😇
Here are to potential explanations for everyone about this "contradiction" The Greek word for “first” in Luke 2:2 is a form of the word protos and can be translated “before.” Thus Luke 2:2 could actually be translated, “This was the census taken before Quirinius was governor of Syria.” Also, Quirinius actually ruled Syria on two separate occasions, and there were actually two censuses taken. The “first census” mentioned in Luke 2:2 occurred during Quirinius’ first term as governor, and another during his second term. The second census is mentioned in Acts 5:37 and probably took place between AD 6 and 7 (Josephus links this census to an uprising led by Judas of Galilee). Luke was the author of both the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts, and his goal was to write “an orderly account” (Luke 1:3). It seems that Luke did write a careful, orderly account: he mentions two censuses, and it was during the first one that Jesus was born. It would be unlikely for such a meticulous historian to make a blatant mistake in his timeline of events. The second explanation is the most accurate probably.
I am not so sure I would call Luke "a meticulous historian." Meticulous historians like we have in the modern day did not exist back then; back in Luke's day a meticulous historian could completely make up a speech, an event or a genealogy simply because it showed some greater theme about the person that was "true." Luke and the other gospel writers are doing this just as much as any other ancient writer. For example, he basically constructs a genealogy for Jesus. Attempting to reconcile the gospel is a futile task. They are unreconcilable because a lot of the story is constructed from memory and simply out of whole cloth. Any credible historian or religious scholar will tell you the same thing, even if they are believers. If you want to believe that is fantastic! But you will just have to live with the contradictions as they are abounding and cannot be assuaged. But, more importantly, to your historical error. Quirinius was not governor of Syria twice. He was appointed legate of Syria in 6 CE, true. However, during the years around 6-4 BCE he was likely a legate in Galatia, and he was essentially in that area for over a decade. There is no way he was somehow able to be a legate in Syria during the same time period. If you have evidence otherwise, I would love to see it. :-)
@@JonathanMartin884 You said a lot of incorrect things about that Geneology, if you simply read the Bible those names are collected. But to each his own sir. I provided all information I know. You can't prove he wasn't, it's Josepheus word over the Gospels and I choose the side of the Gospel of Luke as more credible as there is no way the early church fathers would've approved it otherwise. Most conservative Bible scholars today take a this view, namely, that Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), through David’s son Nathan. Since there was no specific Koine Greek word for “son-in-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter. Through either Mary’s or Joseph’s line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23). You can look into it though. Thank you for your comment.
@@demontejohnson4102 Yes, I've heard all the bad excuses and arguments about this. How can it be Mary's lineage when Luke explicitly says it's Joseph's lineage? If Luke intended to do something as unique and controversial as giving Mary's lineage it is very interesting that he does not note it. Especially since he is some kind of "meticulous historian" according to you. That is not history, that is belief. That would never fly with anyone other than Jesus, but because of the emotions surrounding belief in Jesus, it is basically taken as gospel (pun intended). If I told you that any other person had two genealogies you would almost assuredly think one or both were constructed rather than trying to reconcile what are clearly unreconcilable. Constantine, for example, claims he is related to Claudius Gothicus, and while it is possible there is not a single historian who deems it plausible. This is the same for most constructed lineages; Jesus is not special. When it comes to Quirinus, I am not going off of just Josephus, I am going off of Tacitus and Strabo and Pliny and several others. Everyone says he was in Galatia throughout the last decade of the 1st century BCE. There is not a single credible piece of evidence to show he was not there. Luke himself doesn't even say what you want him to say, you are extrapolating the conclusion you want from the scant evidence you have. Is it possible that he went from Galatia to Syria at some point in the middle of the decade? Sure, I guess it's possible. But other than you really wanting it to happen, it is not plausible. It is just as plausible as anything else that has zero evidence. Credible historians need proof of things, you are making an argument from lack of evidence. There is nothing to suggest he was governor of Syria twice, there is nothing to suggest he was even in Syria from 4-6 BCE, and there are very few secular historians who even want to try and reconcile the gospels. It is a futile operation based solely on belief. If you want to do that, that's fine, but passing it off as credible history is disingenuous.
There is absolutely no evidence at all to suggest Quirinus was governor of Syria twice. In fact, we have evidence to the contrary, as we know he was conducting a military campaign in Galatia until it's conclusion around 3-1BCE. Until this campaign was completed he did not yet hold the prerequisite titles or experience to be made Legate of Syria. As Galatia is considered a seperate area to Syria, his powers, like being able to conduct a census, would not extend to this region at all either. There is also no evidence whatsoever that a "first" census of Quirinus was taken in BCE. One could make the incredibly decietful argument that a census was taken and subsequently lost, but the problem here is, the census supposedly required the entire empire to travel back to their ancestral homeland, the economic impact of which could not be lost in record. We also know that Roman censuses were taken for reason of taxes, this means not only is the act of traveling entirely counter productive but as Judea was not annexed until 6CE, there would be no need to take a census and it would not be considered part of the Empire.
These are good quality videos, thank you. I'm a Catholic -practicing Catholic. I'll add some thoughts here. Our liturgy often reflects seasons...we place major feast at times of year that teach theological ideas. Good Friday/ Easter is in the spring is because that is when Jesus died and rose to life again. Spring is a time of re-birth and new life and new hope. All Souls Day is in November because the year is dying and the liturgy at that time reflects on our deaths and the end times. Similarly December 22-25 is the darkest time of year so when we place the liturgical celebration of the birth of Jesus there it is because it teaches us the a new light shone into humanity during our darkness and coldness of our hearts. So we don't get too hung up on exact dates....thought there were very early Christian writers who say he was born Dec. 25, notable one was St. Ephrem of Syria. Also there is an excellent documentary made by an amateur astronomer about the star of Bethlehem that makes a very convincing case Jesus was born in 2 BC in about May and the Magi arrived on...Dec. 25, making that the first 'Christmas' when gifts were given to the child. Very compelling evidence put forward about the events we know happened in the sky at that time, I'd encourage everyone to find and watch his video.
I used to be skeptical about the theory that great people usually died around the day of their birth. Strangely, both my parents died approximately within a week of their birth days. Were my parents great persons? Being both down-to-earth persons, they strived to live simply, honestly and uprightly, thereby imparting these same values to us, their children. Hence, I personally consider both of them 'great'!
The theory presented in the video is that great people die around the date of their CONCEPTION. Which is 9 months before their birthday (or less months if premature).
@@bluesky6985 We must forget Christians and think of the jews.God and the Jewish calendar. I think this mess of dates was done on purpose by God.Go with the Jewish point of view maybe 🤔.God is mostly symbols. SO PASSOVER is my pick.🌠
I read once that the courses of the Jewish priests were regularly scheduled and that verse tells you the course he was in. You can find the time of year his father would have been in the temple, thats John's conception season. Jesus is said to be 6 months younger I believe. They mother's were pregnant at the same time. That gets you to the zodiac sign at least. Which would be interesting to know. Something to look into. Love your channel!
@@daddada2984 Zodiac signs are a Greek thing, Eastern rome was hellenic primarily, Jesus spoke Greek. I would guess yes, he did believe in Zodiac signs. However, Zodiac signs within the Hellenic and then judeo-hellenic religions werent what modern people make them out to be.
@@RoderickVI do you think, Jesus teachings align with Zodiac sign? Does the stars & planet what bearing to your eternal life? Where is Jesus or apostles teach about zodiac sign?
While I do find it unlikely that Jesus believed in Zodiac signs or any beliefs associated with them, he may have had some idea about them. Besides that, Jesus probably did speak some Greek, considering how hellenized the Roman East was.
Very good outline involving many dates I had not been aware of. Your discussion raises a question I have had for years. If the year of the census is known taking Mary too Bethlehem, shouldn't we also know the time of year? Such travel would never occur during December. More likely late spring early summer. December has never made sense to me.
Fascinating! I'm always eager to hear different analogies on the time of Christ's birth. I, myself, have a theory and I believe He was conceived in December and was born in September which is nine months. I believe the star was His coming to earth through conception and it took the Kings two years to travel to Judea from the East.
"I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me."J.S.-History Helaman 14 reads " And now it came to pass that Samuel, the Lamanite, did prophesy a great many more things which cannot be written. 2 And behold, he said unto them: Behold, I give unto you a sign; for five years more cometh, and behold, then cometh the Son of God to redeem all those who shall believe on his name. 3 And behold, this will I give unto you for a sign at the time of his coming; for behold, there shall be great lights in heaven, insomuch that in the night before he cometh there shall be no darkness, insomuch that it shall appear unto man as if it was day. 4 Therefore, there shall be one day and a night and a day, as if it were one day and there were no night; and this shall be unto you for a sign; for ye shall know of the rising of the sun and also of its setting; therefore they shall know of a surety that there shall be two days and a night; nevertheless the night shall not be darkened; and it shall be the night before he is born. 5 And behold, there shall a new star arise, such an one as ye never have beheld; and this also shall be a sign unto you. 6 And behold this is not all, there shall be many signs and wonders in heaven. 7 And it shall come to pass that ye shall all be amazed, and wonder, insomuch that ye shall fall to the earth. 8 And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall believe on the Son of God, the same shall have everlasting life..." I love thinking about new stars and pillars of light and great lights in the heavens in connections with the Savior's birth. A solar storm could cause "northern" lights anywhere. Aurora borealis would definitely count for great lights for someone who never saw them. I love talking about Him because He is the great light of the world!
@@pkmr5284 I see one argument against this theory. Luke says that "all went to be enrolled, each to his own town". I doubt the enrollment would happen during sowing or harvesting periods as it would lead to lower crops = less food = starvation. The September-October is the time to harvest wheat... I'm personally more keen towards early summer (June?) when weather is good enough to do a long trip and the moment doesn't affect farmers' work.
This is a very good and concise video on the dating, but there is one thing you left out. I wish you had included the full range of Quirinius' governorship, rather than JUST the year of the most significant census. It is possible that that's the census in question; it's also possible that there's a different census that happened earlier but the records haven't been found. EDIT: Or at the very least the video makes it sound like he had already been governor of Syria for some time, rather than being appointed as governor when Archelaus is removed.
The Roman Empire kept VERY good records during that time. If there was another census on the scale of the first one, we would likely know about it. Based on Mathew's account it would also seem much more likely the documented census would be correct one as it would be closer in time to Mathew's account. They would have both been writing about a birth in an estimated date close to one another.
You realize that the entire story of his birth is pure fiction right? They needed to have a reason for Jesus of Nazareth to be born in Bethlehem, in order to fit the prophecy that Christ would be born in Bethlehem. A census is used to determine how many people CURRENTLY live in each city for taxation and dispensation purposes. Nobody returns to their hometown for a census, since that would destroy the entire purpose of the thing. It’s just an excuse someone invented to fit Jesus into being born in Bethlehem.
@@roems6396 " Nobody returns to their hometown for a census, since that would destroy the entire purpose of the thing. It’s just an excuse someone invented to fit Jesus into being born in Bethlehem." OR it could've been that the Jews (since Kings like Solomon and David) ALSO did census, they Jews acted based on how the census were made. After all, for the 12 tribes it was very important to be in your hometown in any census because the census kept track for each individual tribe, rather than region and only the people from each tribe counted (example: if you were born in Judea and lived on Ephraim, you would have to move back to Judea for the census since it kept track of Jews especifically, not how many were actually living in there) so it's very likely the Jews actually moved back to their houses.
I have found some information on Quirinius you might be interested in: Quirinius was appointed legate of Syria (i.e. governor) around 6 CE in order to oversee the formation of the newly created province of Iudaea, which included Judea. This new 'province' was to be part of Syria. ( The 'province' of judea would not be a Roman Province in the technical sense for another ~130 years. Additionally, the terms translated as governor when concerning Quirinius in Syria, and when concerning say Pontius Pilate in Judea are not the same. They are Legate and Prefect respectively, which are significantly different positions. ) Syria Palaestina (a renamed Iudaea) would eventually separate from the rest of Syria after numerous revolts made emperor Hadrian station an entire extra legion in the area.
The census was for the 15th Jubilee of the founding of Rome at April 21, 753 BC. They timed it for the feast of tabernacles where each tribe goes back to their ancestral home
Since you are planning to do a video on who wrote the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith thought Jesus was born on April 6, which was why he started his church on that date.
Other then the laughable assertion that the reason folk avoid using BC/AD is because they don't know the exact year of the birth of Jesus, rather than the attempt to ignore or hide the actual personage of Jesus, this was a great breakdown of the known facts about the year of his birth. As for the sheep, there is a more accurate argument about sheep being in the field, which means it had to happen after harvest, and after the poor people were allowed to glean the fields post harvest. There is zero reason for the sheep to be in the fields from planting season till after harvest. During that time they were kept further away. No sheepherder wanted or wants to pay for a half eaten field of wheat. This usually points to a Septemberish date for the birth of Jesus.
@@suzannehartmann946 and they were 1-2 foot thick, stacked stone. No one was building a wall around their fields. On occasion some overnight corrals were built out in the middle of nowhere, and if they were lucky, the butcher might have a small holding pen. It was the sheepherders responsibility to keep the sheep out of the fields, there was little room for "accidents". It could literally mean the livelihood of the sheepherder and her family if she messed up and did not control the sheep.
You got everything right, but missed out the most trustworthy indication: "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar [...]" (Lk 3:1) "Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age" (Lk 3:23)
Nice to know that Luke only knew "about" how old Jesus was. That means that early Christians did not worship his conception day nor his womb-exit day. I wonder when was Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua's circumcision day, and when if that fleshy body ascended into supernatural energy and re-joined the rest of his body. Sorry if I take religion too seriously/realistically for most mere self-soothers.
@@letsomethingshine You can see how the first generation of Christians thought about his birth from Gal 4:4 "God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law" That's all.
Imo I think that the census story was Luke's attempt to find an explanation on why Jesus was born in Bethlehem. It would make more sense to me if he was born near the Passover because it was common to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem then, and the "no room in the inn" would be because everyone was in the area for passover. Bethlehem is 5 miles from the old city, so to me this is the best explanation.
I think both Luke and Matthew were *both* independently trying to come up with a reason why Jesus, known to have grown up in Nazareth, was born in Bethlehem. Matthew says that they _used_ to live in Bethlehem, but were forced to flee by Herod when Jesus was a toddler, first to Egypt and then later to Nazareth. Luke says they _normally_ lived in Nazareth, but temporarily travelled to Bethlehem for a census when Jesus was born. I think the most likely answer is that Jesus was just born in Nazareth, where he grew up, and where all his extended family was born and grew up.
@@rambling964 Only problem with that explanation is that later in life he had a lot of acquaintances among wealthy people from Jerusalem and suburbs. How could he have gotten to know these people if he grew up in Nazaret (a town that is btw not even mentioned in Josephus' list of towns in Galilee), and only visited Jerusalem once as an adult and only was in town for a few days before he was apprehended and executed?
@@wncjan that's an interesting question, but one I'm not sure is answered by him having lived in Bethlehem until he was a toddler (or, re:Luke, having spent a few nights there). Can you go into more detail about your theory?
I have it that the Catholic Church set Dec 25 to supplant the pagan ritual of winter solstice in Germany, Just as All Saint's Day (Nov 1) was put in place to supplant the Druid night of the dead in the UK.
the bible gives us Jesus age at the time of his death - 33 1/2 years old. count back 6 months from the time of his death, and you land around october, which would still have allowed for the shepherds to have been in the fields with their flocks.
Even though I was brought up a Christian, I would call myself spiritual now. But I now know that the religions were made up to cause confusion/wars etc.. if Christians was to spend more time researching outside of the bible they would no about "The council of Nicea" regarding a meeting to discuss how to make jesus the sun of god and about Constantine and how he became the face of jesus and that jesus is just another worshipped deity in our timeline. but yes..its fascinating how they come up with all these without no documentation or family tree from mary and Joseph etc
That's funny. Why would an atheist have any interest at all in what year Jesus was born? Do not atheist disbelieve in Jesus at all? No criticism here, but it seems odd.
@@megadavis5377 not all atheists believe the same thing. The only shared trait is a lack of a belief in God or gods. Personally, I think there could have been a historical person or people that the story of Jesus in the Bible were based on, but I also enjoy learning about this stuff in the same way I enjoy learning about Greek or Roman mythology.
I am an atheist to. Jebus may have been a real human or a number of people written about and stories collected in one book but jebus could not have been his name. I just dont believe in any god. You are almost atheist too you just believe in one of the many gods invented. But the rest are just silly made up nonsense right! Nothing wrong with an interest in history
I Denmark he's born on the 24th. of december. In Denmark, we do not celebrate the birth of Jesus. Christmas dates back to Viking times, when they held a week-long celebration around the winter solstice. We are not Vikings anymore but we eat like them, lots of pork
As religious person. I really respect this explanation and kinda interesting. Ofcourse the exact date for Jesus born is remain unknown. But considering Jesus was born in non-royal society which sometimes ignored by historical writing. Those evidences maybe the best or the most accurate that we have to know the range time for the birth of Jesus.
religion is a scam , and if you believe in it thats very heartwarming but you been had. i notice people are starting to realize this, i love christman for its tradition of family gathering and gifts giving but religion is all bu.....t.
@@littlebigjohn69 scam is if you joined pyramid scheme. Religious is just way of life, not a fake cryptos, unless you were scammed by certain man within church . Every person has right to choose their family value, education institution nor community. If you plane would crash, we will think the same : hope for miracle. Unless you're have homelander's power
@@user-lr6hw4dq4t listen if you feel comfortable in your belief that is great but my issue is how religion has robbed of peoples money to control their power over everyone. if you believe a guy in the clouds is watching everyone your hallucinating and dillusional thinking. religion is not a way of life maybe to some uneducated person who will believe in anything and is threthen with his insucurity in life. Now some people are waking up to this scam and are questioning the truth and finding that this is the 21 st century not the 1400 . As an open minded person with some normality if their is a god he must be a horrible person to let wars go on and let little kids just born to have painful diseases in hospitals. Watch GEORGE CARLIN talk about religion he puts everything in perspective.
If we think about how much money goverments have used to build pointless buildings (churches and so on...) ye its a scam. all that money could have cured cancer
@@littlebigjohn69 im not hallucinating bcs I an't using weed and aware my choice. So do you figured out why so many mental illness in 21st century while humanity reaching its peak regarding quality of life? I dont force atheist to believe in God, but you guys just offensive everywhere ruining how people choose the way of their lives. You must be gratefull if you're living in country free from wars or natural disaster, but how about the peoples who don't have luxury like yours? If your govt is perfect, you wont need religious social services for those who're need. Theist people still doing better when it comes to social services, just let them be. Even every govt backed humantarian aid have political intention such how EU did for doing dirty things through 3rd world partners. People like you just see the world only as black or white without any spectrum. I simply giving my respect to this videos bcs its scientific approach and dont care about your skepticism. Im just stoic guy doing my life and try to educate my children in certain way.
Quirinius was twice governor, first time 3-2 BCE. Herod died Spring 1 BCE (Lunar eclipse Jan 10, 01 BCE, 4 BCE was only a partial). announcement to Mary during Hanukkah, which starts on the 25 of the month. Jesus born Sep 11, 03 BCE - the Great Sign of Revelation 12:1-2. Jupiter (Tzedek) with Regulus (Melek) of Leo (Ariyeh) above Vergo (the virgin)
I love your channel, I have learn so much thanks to your videos. I'm Mexican and the reason we were told why the Catholic Church chose to celebrate the birth of Jesus the day we celebrate it is that around the day the first priests arrived in Mexico they realized the native people had a celebration of the birth of the sun. The people celebrated for 9 days with music and food every night and the last day was December 24 at midnight . Overtime the Catholic Church to make the natives believe in Jesus combined this festivity with the birth of Jesus. The Catholic Church then celedreted the birth of Jesus December 25. This is the story of how the Mexican Posadas started, the celebration of the birth of Jesus that begins the night of December 16, and ends the midnight of December 24.
La Navidad se celebra el 25 de diciembre desde antes de la conquista. Más bien los nativos americanos empezaron a utilizar la liturgia católica mezclada con la propia resultando en el sincretismo existente.
Quirinius was governor a Syria at an earlier point. The governorship in 6 CE was his second. This information can be found in Strabo and the works of Ramsey. It's a fascinating study and well worth the time and effort.
No he wasn't, this is lazy nonsense by Christian apologists. He was fighting a war between 11-3 BC. They have to try to con people with rhis because otherwise Luke is talking nonsense. Luke gets the date of the Census right, 6CE.
@@paulfell4962 Strabo was a Christian apologist? Emil Schurer, a Jew, was a Christian apologist? Suetonius was a Christian apologist? Ramsey, the archeologist, was a Christian apologist? Ramsey, the one who dug up entire cities, I would hardly call him lazy. The true lazy ones are those who read Luke and Matthew and conclude they are at odds and don't do any further study.
@@johnmillett2831 And the true buffoons are those who believe in a previous governorship when it didn't happen. Thew guy who put this piece together didn't mention a previous governorship, that's because it didn't happen.
@@johnmillett2831 Your problem is you'retryimg to look atthis book as a history book, it isn't. He wasn't Governor twice & Christian apologists have tried to use Luke meant "Protector" not Governor. Just admit it, the Gospels are contradictory nonsense of a supernatural legend & anyone one believes this "story" without evidence is embarrassing themselves.
Great history lesson and one which as a Roman Catholic I also have no difficulty appreciating. As we are still in the Christmas season and hopefully still not to late Happy Hanukkah and Merry Christmas. 🙋👪🤱
Very interesting and enjoyable presentation. I have tried to piece this together myself and it was above my abilities and knowledge. This was an excellent review of the known and unknown details.
no, the entire world is the same, even the churches of it and the person who made this video too. They no more understand John 4 about spirt and truth than they do the great prophet Jeremiah in chapter 16 and his revelation of the “inherited lies of the gentiles”. It’s really this simple; spiritual discernment is not derived from the intellect of a fleshly mind. If it was that then all the worldly wise men would know and perceive it, including the evil and unrighteous ones. No, It is solely a gift and revelation from God to those who sought and found him with a sincerely true and open heart. After all, He knows the heart, He tries the reigns. Or perhaps people forgot that His thoughts are higher than our thoughts, and His ways are higher than our ways? As scripture does reveal, “they hear the world and they know the world, and the world knows them, but we are of the Spirit, they neither hear nor know us”. You see, until the return of our Lord with his Kingdom, this world is satan’s kingdom and all the fleshly activities from the hands of sin; which every person possesses, is of it and serve his will and purpose. It’s why we have no works to boast of, no matter how well the intention. So much is still without understanding. Is it your desire to know when the Lord was born? Start in John: 1:1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 1:14 … and the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. Though depending on which translation you’re reading it may not be the same words; the subtlety of satan’s deceit. At least this video does expose one of the many cultural deceits regarding the wise men at the nativity. I often wonder if people understand that it’s approx. 80 miles from Galilee to Bethlehem and there were no cars, airplanes, or buses. Does it really make sense that a man walking and leading a donkey carrying a woman right at the end of her trimester period would take such a journey through the mountains in winter? No it doesn’t make any more sense than being blind of that which is right before your face and deaf of that which is sounding in your very ear. How does that happen? Yet none question it, they readily go along with the cultural doctrine of men just as they were told and taught. Certainly not doing as they were commanded; to take heed that no man deceive them. Yet understand all are deceived, which is why we’re commanded to come out from the land of Babylon. Wouldn’t it make a lot more sense for such a trip to occur after the final fruits of the harvest are gathered and put away in the barn with the time to rest afterward as was the practice in an agrarian society? Do you know and understand the law and the feasts of the Lord? Probably not, because again the doctrine of men would have you believe that such things were nailed to the cross and done away with. Yet what did He say, “I came not to destroy, but to fulfill; the law and the prophets”. And in another place, “the law, the prophets, and the psalms”. Yet the ear of today is just as deaf to the prophet now as it was back then. So ask yourself then; because most people likely never have despite reading the words over and over again, when does the Word, or anything for that matter, become flesh? As per Rev 19; “and His name is called; The Word of God.” Under the law, do you know what the 15th day of the 7th month is? Because it’s in scripture over and over again. It might be considered to make an effort to both know and understand each and every reference. Just as many other such situations that are just as covered up and hidden. And under the law, what comes on the 8th day after the birth of a male child and it becoming flesh? Is it not the circumcision? Who among us has the eye to see and the ear to hear? And if you can discern when that day occurred, then count back 9 months (273 days) and where does it land? Because that’s what was celebrated originally; the overshadowing by the Lord. But you can thank the doctrine of men and their hands of sin works from ~1700 years ago for covering these things up. Yet Paul himself said, it was already at work long before then. It all hinges on this: Matthew 27:50-52; who were they, where did they come from, and where did they go? I would suggest that it was the greatest conspiracy to deny the truth that has ever occurred on this world. Let the words that follow below as found in scripture be a sign unto you: 1. Why did Paul lament over his day and night teachings for three years? 2. Why did Jesus say, “and then I will profess to them; I never knew you, depart from me, ye who work iniquity”? 3. Who is mystery Babylon, as spoken of in Revelation? What if I told you that it’s not those who are neither evil in the flesh nor without God in the flesh who are walking through the wide gate on the broad path merrily to their own destruction? As Psalm 1 states, “the ungodly shall not stand in the judgement, nor the sinners among the congregation of the righteous”. The reality is this, “afflicted is the gate and narrow the way, which leads to life, and few there be who find it”. Could it possibly be fewer than the doctrine of men might deceive you into believing? Take ye heed brothers and sisters, take ye heed. .. for I am thy fellow servant and of the brethren that do possess the testimony of Jesus, worship and praise God, for this is the testimony of Jesus; the Spirit, the Prophesy. Let those gifted with the ear, hear … .
@@tehhermitsheep8711 It is refreshing to see a Christian actually admit that there is no logic to their religion and that their religion is completely reliant on personal beliefs (or what can be referred to as the individuals faith).
@@ObjectiveEthicsWhat does the Bible say? Within this verse is your answer. Judas (not iscoriot) said Lord how is it that you will manifest yourself to us and not to the world?
Excellent video, I loved the historical and chronological analysis. And the attempt to reconcile them with the biblical accounts in Matthew and Luke. Though much of it shrouded in mystery. I also liked your subtle sense of humor
While you did your usual great job on covering the year, I’m disappointed in you half-hearted efforts on the day. There are many reasons that Dec. 25th is not supportable, and none of them involve sheep. Your research is usually much better than this. If you’re interested, I recommend you start with when and why Dec. 25th was actually made official by the Catholic Church. I hope you enjoy the history as much as I did.
Your video is clear and well presented. Your idea that it was the lambing season that He was born goes with what I've learnt. In that area of the world, spring is usually around March/April, in the month of Nisan. What festivals are held in the month of Nisan? Passover / Feast of Unleavened Bread / Feast of First Fruits. There is one other that falls on the 10th day of that month - Palm Sunday, or the day of the Lamb. You can find these feasts in Leviticus 23-26. The shepherds would be out in the fields waiting for the birthing of the lambs - the very first lamb. When they'd get one, they would raise it in the air and shout, "I have my lamb, I have my lamb". This lamb would be held for the following years sacrifices at the temple. God, on the other hand was saying, "Accept my Lamb, accept my Lamb as your sacrifice". So my theory is Jesus was born and died in the same month. But His return will be during the last three feasts in autumn - Trumpets, Day of Atonement (Judgment day) and Tabernacles - because the first four (including Festival of Harvest or Pentecost) have been fulfilled.
Jesus was born and died on Passover Nissan 1th March 21, Springtime Passover. It was the lambing season. Jesus is the sacrificed lamb, who takes away the sins of the world. and Jesus will return the same day, when he was born and when he died. Matthew 2:1-2 Luke 2:7-8 Luke 1: 5-9 Exodus 12:3-6 Exodus 40:1-2 Isaiah 60:1-6
Winter is the busiest season in the pen - it’s kidding and lambing season. From late November to late March there will be a number of births each day; between 100 and 200 kids and lambs will be born here
Amazing video. Since the gospels were written at least several decades after the events they cover, I would love to hear about what historical inaccuracies were commonly accepted at the time of their writing that would have led to the discrepancies. As in, historians have always been plagued by inaccurate year counting. Is it possible that the gospel writers were also under false assumptions about their recent history that could have led to the disagreement? Perhaps we'll never know, but it's interesting to think about. Also, EX-JW FTW, Matt!
The closest gospel was written 100 years after the supposed death of the purported Messiah, there are no actual records of a man named Jesus being crucifed. There were, however, a large number of men claiming to be the prophesised Saviour of the Jews at the time, so it is most likely that Jesus is a composit of the most popular and that is why there is such a wide margin between the two stories of his birth - different men trying to claim they fulfilled the requirement of the prophesy. While there is evidence that the gospels were based on earlier writings (there is talk of a Gospel of Mary amongst others) it does not appear that any part of those writings survive (unless they are hidden in the Vatican Secret Library and no one has managed to formulate the right request to be able to get a look at them). Also the texts that were compiled into the first Bibles were chosen by a committee of Vatican clerics, and you probably know how well committees make decisions. (ie not well and very slowly and expensively)
@@SevCaswell you really managed to make such a significant blunder I am even wondering what your sources are considering most liberal scholars would date atleast ONE gospel to prior to 100AD...which would be 70ish years. This is even allowing for just a gross liberal estimation, the evidence points to the 4 gospels all being written within the 1st century with John at the end of the century
Mind that Luke's gospel was adressed mainly to non-Jews Roman citizens (Luke is commonly considered to be the travel companion of Paul, so he wasn't in contact with a direct witness). So it's not surprising that it places Jesus to be born into the Empire and not in a peripheral kingdom, and refers to facts known to the Romans (Quirinus governor of Syria, the census...) and not to the cruelty of a client king.
@@SevCaswell Actually all the four gospels had been probably written between 30 to 70 years after the death of Christ, that's very close as long as ancient sources are concerned.
Luke proved to be a reliable historian. Notice that Luke 2:2 says that the census taken around the time Joseph and Mary went down to Bethlehem was the (FIRST) census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. This implies that there was a later census, most likely the one referred to by Josephus.
A small correction: Crassus was killed in 53 BCE, not 56 BCE (he attended the Lucca conference in that year). I think the date 56 BCE comes from the game Rome Total War, but feel free to correct me. Nice video nonetheless.
On the Massacre of the Innocents. As has been established by the absence of the year 0, the ancients started counting at 1. So by extension babies were 1 year old when born. This would explain why it is mentioned that Herod had all male infants 2 y/o and younger (i.e. between their birth and first year, as we would count it today) murdered. This would narrow the Matthew interval to between 5 and 4 BCE.
Devout Christian (Protestant) here. Love your video! Raw history with no assumptions or leanings. We'll never know the exact date and it only matters that it happened, not when.
Thanks so much for a very interesting presentation! it's good to know more facts than I heard before. The important thing is our Christmas and that it is celebrated by most Christians. I love the season!
Very nice explanation, I love how you always manage to make number-crunching an enlightening experience. The only thing that may have been of note was how the year 1 AD was originally decided upon. (The fact that you did do this with the date of Christmas begs the question even further.)
in the 6th century Dionyses Exiguus had the task to calculate a new scedule for Easter Dates and proposed to count the years no longer as Anno Martyrium ( from Dioclatius days) but from the birth of Christ as Anno Dominum .... he just missed a few years in his calculation. And he is forgiven, have you ever tried to make a calculation using Roman numbers only?
@Nehemiah Scudder could well be the case, the date of the destruction of the Temple was well documented in the Roman writting. I don't know the numerological meaning of the number 70 and Googling for it just gave me a fresh load of poppycock. I was thinking there could be a connection with the year of Yubilee every 49th year, but is more likely that was something in the 6th century that was not on Dionyses mind at all. Far too Jewish.
@Nehemiah Scudder makes even more sense and much more conveniant than calculating using Roman numbers Awell, Dionysius would have converted the date of the destruction.... Year 2 of the reign of Vespasian to a Anno Martyrium date and the Era of the Martyrs started 284 CE Ab Urbe Condatum was used by Livius but I don't know if it was used after him.
This is probably the clearest and most concise account of the discrepancies of the various biblical texts, placed in the context of known historical events. I guess one conclusion could be that, since he was born sometime between 6BC and AD6 we actually have the BC/AD line in the correct place :) Merry Christmas!
Oh no how can people still getting their brainwashed very well in 21st century ❤️ Om ❤️
Split the difference, minimize the error!
@@GabrielBlancoCabassa a tale as old as time
Jesus is the christ within , the 🌞 Sun
@@shubhamraj9986 ?
In his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) has a whole chapter devoted to how the Christian liturgy is tied to time and the four seasons. Christmas was celebrated on the winter solstice because it is the darkest day of the year, but hence forth the days get longer and lighter. Christians believe Christ is the light of the world dispelling the darkness, and bringing light to the world. This is similarly why the feast of the passion of John the Baptist is celebrated on June 24th near the summer solstice, in John 3:30, we read John the Baptist saying “He must increase, but I must decrease.” After the summer solstice the days get shorter, or decrease. The sun, associated with John the Baptist, now decreases and prepares the way for the coming of Christ at Christmas. It’s an idea that’s sadly been lost, but the Christian liturgy and liturgical seasons are highly tied to the four seasons and express the cosmic dimension of Christ’s death and resurrection. Thank you for your informative video and your great channel!
Romans could have been mithraists and that explains why winter solstice was so important to them. In ancient Iran and even today Yalda or Chelleh is celebrated on winter solstice.
That's why 21-25 December is called the birthday of the Sun, it has been celebrated in every Sun worshiping religion, while 21-25 June is called the day of Sun death.
John of Patmos was an astrologer, that's why John's gospel and John's Book of Revelation have so many future sights, codes and astronomy, like the stars that told the Persians about Jesus' birth. That was so obvious, and that's why I consider it a gnosis gospel; since gnosis used to relate religion to astrology. Also, John's books used to describe the Son of God as a God himself, while the other gospels used to describe the Son of God close to the meaning of God's lover, just like the old testament. That's why the Romans worked so hard to put John's books in the Bible, because it is very similar to their religion.
@@Normal_user_coniven
The story of the Magi is not in John's Gospel all. Nor is any Nativity story except for the statement that "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, as of the Only-Begotten of the Father."
I guess Christ is an inappropriate god for folks in the southern hemisphere to consider their own then.
@Yohanan facts Jesus is the real king
You overlooked one major fact. Zacharias was of the order (course) of Abijah. In I Chronicles chapter 24 king David divided the priests into family groups (courses) and assigned to each of them the weeks in which they would officiate the temple services. The course of Abijah was served during early June and after serving his week of service Zacharias went home and Elizabeth conceived (most likely in late June). It is clearly stated that John the Baptist was 6 months older than Jesus. Since we can reasonably assume that John was born in the spring then it follows that Jesus would have been born 6 months later in the fall, probably in September.
You are correct Papa T. Jesus was most likely born on Feast of Tabernacles. When He would Tabernacle (dwell) with the people. Same time He will return for His Second Coming. The Lord's timing has nothing to do with the Gregorian calendar, but with The Feasts.
He definitely was not born December 25th. That was adopted from pagan winter solstice celebrations such as Saturnalia. So why did the Catholic church adopt this festival and does God aporove? The church did this to get pagans to join the chjrch to increase flock size. God does not approve of this,not does he approve of xmas
I was born August 28 1967 two weeks early, conceived in December
@@janellehouillon9067 I like to think he was born on the day of atonement because he came to atone for our sins but of course that’s just wishful thinking on my part. Your idea is also a pleasing one and just as likely to be correct.
@@geraldwalsh6489 I agree. Cain chose to worship God in his own way and it was rejected by God. Saul chose to worship God in his own way and it was rejected by God. The Priesthood of Jesus day chose to worship God in their own way and it was rejected by God.
Why people think they can worship God in their own way is a mystery to me. I argued many times with my wife about this subject over how we raised our sons. It took me years to get through to her about it but eventually she began to teach it to her sisters. There was no way I could teach my children to believe in lies and then have to face God about it.
Hi Matt. I enjoyed your video a lot and it raised in me this question about my faith.
I recently brought this discrepancy between Matthew and Luke to a biblical archeologist friend and I'm hoping you might consider the evidence he brought forth for me that was lacking in your video. The information that he shared with me is not readily available because it includes discoveries made within the last 20 years; it is nowhere listed on wiki or the first dozen google answers.
So, Quirinius was "twice-governor" of Syria. He was governor of Syria when Herod was alive, and he was also governor at the time of that later date, 6ce. This has been mostly confirmed by the recent translations of ancient texts.
You will notice in your video that you presented Luke 2:1, where Luke writes, "This was the *first* census" that was taken while Quirinius was governor. That implies that there was second, or more, censuses taken. In fact, wiki only lists "THE census of quirinius." In my research on the history of Michigan I discovered that this type of verbal confusion is common. For instance, there is a 1st and 2nd Treaty of Chicago that the US made with three native groups in the early 1820's; but the Second Treaty of Chicago is frequently referenced as "The Treaty of Chicago" because the other one is so often overlooked. I believe a similar situation is happening here.
Luke writes that this census was taken "for all the roman world." The second census that Quirinius took was this 6ce one, which was, of course, for Judea only, as you pointed out -- but this simply gives evidence that this Judean census is the implied second census, not the full, first census.
In addition: a census of all the roman world was an event that would have taken many years, as emissaries from Rome travelled on horseback throughout the Mediterranean. So to pin a census on a particular year is also difficult.
All of this information puts the birth of Jesus at 7-5bce, from my understanding.
Is any of this information useful? If you find time for a response I'd love to hear from ya.
-John, in Michigan
I was wondering about the specifics of quirinius’s governorship. It makes sense that he would have served twice, because of how the senate appointed Governors (although I’m not sure if that was the same in Imperial Rome as in Republican Rome)
Adding the ordinate "first" to imply there were multiple following is _not_ the same as dropping the ordinate. That people drop the "second" from the name of the treaty only implies ignorance on their part that there was a first, which happens with the Geneva Conventions regarding the treatment of non-combatants, or conflation of the two, which happens with the Geneva Conventions, or that the second is of such overwhelming importance and newer thus more relevant, that it is obviously the one being discussed, as happens with the Geneva Conventions.
I agree Quirinius must have been governor twice - Luke was very specific to say the census was for the entire empire, not just Judea. And he was writing to an official of some standing in the empire to specifically give a historical account.
What you’ve said is on Wikipedia but it stipulates that this claim is made without evidence. Convenient that your friend can’t provide any actual evidence for his claims…
In Greek protos can mean first or before. Before Quirinius was governor and held his census in Judea is also an option
The historian in me appreciates this video. The Catholic in me also appreciates the video as well. Thanks for the great video.
Same here, I think it's rather interesting that 1 A.D seems to be the median between the two potential dates but that also might be coincidental
@@kzizzles8329 Maybe thats why year Zero was meant to go there?
Also a Catholic who appreciates the video
+ Romans 10:9-10 "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."
Are you saved by Jesus Christ, my friend?
I knew there were discrepancies, but thanks for laying out the historical arguments so clearly!
Please read Chapter Maryam the blessed mother of Prophet Jesus peace be upon him known as Eesa in the final revelation the Holy Quran.
Rose please write (P.B.U.H) aswel thank you.
After you write EESA (A.S) I hope it is cleare thank you.
@@rosem5041 I would like to read, what do you want me to notice from there?
@@rosem5041 Better stick to the original Torah.
I actually really appreciate how you start by honestly saying there won't be a definitive answer and not save that conclusion to the end.
This transparency is lacking on RUclips because channels want them views and retention rates.
Now I have my expectations set and I'm still going to watch the entire thing.
The story I was told during my years at Catholic grammar school was: Dec. 25th was chosen as the day to celebrate Jesus’s birthday because it was also the day of celebration of the winter solstice. By adopting that date, the Church leaders hoped 1) to take advantage of the customary nature of solstice gatherings, and 2) to gradually supplant the solstice celebration with the so-called date of Jesus’s birth. I was never taught that the earliest Christians believed the 25th of December was actually Jesus’s birthday. I was also taught that the year of Jesus’s birth was unclear and probably fell somewhere between 4 BC and 7 AD. It appears the nuns’ teachings aligned fairly well with the facts in this video. Another thing to note: Luke, one of the Gospel authors mentioned in the video, was not an apostle and had never met Jesus. Matthew had been an apostle and knew Jesus for several years before the crucifixion. It’s likely that during the time span of Jesus’s ministry, he shared some stories of his early life with his followers. That might give more credence to Matthew’s version.
25th of December is never the winter solstice. Stop believing in lies that are easily debunked.
Exactly what we were taught at our catholic school. Also we were taught that Easter was the most important time to commemorate, the most important date in the Christian calendar. The birth of Jesus was important but his death and resurrection is what being Christian is all about.
"It appears the nuns’ teachings aligned fairly well with the facts in this video."
Go back, look again.
"terminus ante quem" (TAQ) "the point before which" is 4 BCE, meaning "no later than 4 BCE" (latest end date)
"terminust post quem" (TPQ) "the point after which" is 6 CE, meaning "no earlier than 6 CE" (earliest start date)
Absurdly, the 2 sources on Jesus' birth have the TAQ come BEFORE the TPQ.
Either one is wrong, or the other, ...or they CAN be both wrong... but the only thing NOT possible is both being right.
I always thought there was a clue in the story of Jesus' family returning for the passover when he was 12 years old. When they finally find him after searching for three days, he explains how he must be about his father's business, as if his parents should have plainly realized this. "Know ye not that I must be about my father's business?" Therefore, I posit that he was indeed born during the passover (the paschal lamb) and had a birthday while they were there, making him 13, or the age at which Jewish tradition holds that a boy has become a man. From this story we also see that it was sort of common for families to travel to their home town for the passover, which might have been why Augustus chose that time to take the census. It was convenient. If this is true, Christ also would have died just about the time of his birthday, the sacrificial lamb, born during the passover and sacrificed during the pass over. Possibly, the day he rose from the dead was his actual birthday. So that would be pretty cool.
There never was a census that required anyone to travel to some ancestral home. The idea is ludicrous.
I agree with you 100%!!!
@@leonardshevlin7260 Sir, with all due respect: You don't know what you're talking about.
@@assievanderwesthuizen6314 There's never been a census requiring people to go to an ancestral home.
The myths of the origins of Yeshua are absurd. People enjoy believing nonsense and the more ridiculous the better.
A global flood! Animals on a ship together! A magic beanstalk! Surviving being swallowed by a whale! A talking serpent!
What you should think about is that nobody bothered to record anything about what this child prodigy did for the following eighteen years before he started his career as an apocalyptic cult leader.
Even though a lot of recorded history turns out to be an estimate, it still soothes my mind to at least have a general idea of when we are talking about. Thanks for this great explanation!
Yeah when it comes to dates that long ago, exact years (while nice to know chronologically) are not that important as life remained pretty much the same in scales that small. Whether it was 4 BCE or 6 CE we can imagine that time period and know there was a King who was vassal to Augustus
@@jayit6851
What king are you talking about?
Would really cool to see some progression on this by following up about the “star”. What was going on it the sky through that general window of time? Comets, Supernova etc
don't trust your mind, you're clearly delusional. see a dr. they have great medication for ppl that believe in in myths and have imaginary friends.. ppl of that ilk are an embarrassment to humanity and to evolution, congratulations.
@@VINvIN344 Who the heck are you talking to?
Luke 3:23 says Jesus was "about 30 years of age" when he began his ministry, and John mentions Jesus attending at least three yearly Passover feasts, meaning that Jesus' ministry lasted about three years and that he was about 33-years-old when he died. If Jesus was born during 6 CE (implied by Luke), that means Jesus died during 39 CE, three years after the governorship of Pontius Pilate ended. If Jesus was born between 6 and 4 BCE (implied by Matthew), that means Jesus died between 27 and 29 CE, which fits into Pontius Pilate's governorship. However, Luke 3:1-3 says John the Baptist's ministry started "in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar", which would be 29 CE. Jesus didn't start his ministry until after John the Baptist started his, so this would mean that Jesus began his ministry and died in the same year (29 CE) if we're going by Matthew's birth narrative. This would also mean that Jesus was about 33 when his ministry began and that his ministry lasted less than a year, contradicting the length of time that Jesus' ministry lasted in John's gospel. If we just look at Luke's narrative and ignore every other gospel, then Jesus was born in 6 CE, John the Baptist started his ministry in 29 CE, and Jesus started his own ministry seven years later in 36 CE when he was about 30. 36 CE was also the last year Pontius Pilate was governor, so again this leaves no wiggle room for Jesus' ministry to last longer than one year.
Alright, so what about the word "about" do you not understand? It's also worth noting that only Luke claims he was "about 30 years of age" meaning that you can only apply that logic to the Gospel of Luke and not to any of the other gospels, since they have their own chronology.
Then again the authors of the bible can’t even agree on basic theology
@@BurnBird1 and yet according to christians:
A) the four canonical gospels are all totally infallible
B) the four canonical gospels all agree with each other, ie there are no discrepancies across the gospels.
The gospels are either hard fact, as christians claim, meaning they can all be reconciled, or else they are fictional, and made up many years after any germ of a fact, as evidence suggests. GLuke even admits this outright in the introduction if you read it (though creative translation sometimes has GLuke claiming to be a witness to the events described, this is not possible, due to the fact of it being written in AD80 at the earliest. A more proper translation of the Greek would be "the things we believe" rather than "the things we witnessed". It's surprising how much of this stuff is right there in the bible, covered up by creative translation efforts).
@@CalumCarlyle No, you can't just make up two extremes like that. The gospel accounts don't have to be either "hard fact" or else "fictional" There's middle ground there, as well as different parts of the gospels falling on different levels on the spectrum. The birth narratives for example, considering how ahistorical they are and that both authors don't agree and have theological reasoning behind how they construct them, can therefore be concluded to be almost entirely fictional. Other parts of the gospels however, such as the fact that Jesus was crucified, is agreed upon by all the gospels, as well as extra-biblical sources, so we can therefore assume with some certainty that it probably did happen. The gospels are *very* biased documents, but just because they are biased doesn't mean that we can't gleam some truths from it, especially when we contrast it with less biased sources.
@@yassine073t years and exact dates do not contribute to the theology at all.
He was born at the time of the year that the sacrificial lambs were born in Bethlehem. The parallels are mind blowing.
During the Holy fall feasts - He "tabernacled" with us!❤️🙏❤️
Exactly.
The Lamb of God.
.. you have no scriptural evidence that supports your claim.
Lambs were killed for Passover meal. Lambs were not for offering as sacrificial animals.
Funny thing is, 1AD would be roughly the mean average between the two different dates given by the Gospels. So you could argue that it's a good compromise between the two discrepancies.
Exactly my thought
That is a good compromise, although to be honest I would be more inclined to believe the book of Matthew over the book of Luke, since Matthew himself lived during Jesus’s time while Luke lived well after the fact.
@@ashenwolf98 What evidence is there that Matthew loved during Jesus’ time?
@@ashenwolf98 As far as I know the gospels are anonymous snd the naming is just church tradition so we don't know if the author (or authors of) of Matthew (or the others) were ever even close to have met Jesus.
Well the Anno Domini dating system was made by Dionysius the Humble, a 6th century monk. So you have to realize the Gospels and (maybe) a general idea of Roman history is all he had to go off of. I say he got pretty darn close in his guesstimate.
Great vid! As a Christian, specific dates such as Jesus’s birth aren’t important (I celebrate Christmas according to the Julian Calendar, which falls on January 7). Rather, the message of giving, loving your neighbor, and celebrating Jesus is much more important. I wish everyone the best during this holiday season, God bless!
May I ask why you use the Julian calendar?
@@calebcustombricks2631 They are likely an Eastern Orthodox Christian, since that is their liturgical calendar :)
The Christmas of today I do not celebrate as the day of Christ’s birth but its internal message of family, kinship and coming together to enjoy life is more important to my self than knowing when Jesus was born, though it would be a nice detail to have.
@@zakh-g4893 + Romans 10:9-10 "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."
Are you saved by Jesus Christ, my friends?
As someone living near Bethlehem, it's FREEZING in December. It's not European, but I suppose -3°C on an average night is not a great sleeping temperature.
Although the Roman warm period has the average temperature of the earth at that time as 1-2C warmer than today with some regions up to 4-6C warmer during winter.
@@stephenwells1559 3°C is still quite cold, if you ask me.
Jesus was crucified in the Spring, and was 33 1/2 years old, when he was crucified. This would put his Birth in, quite possibly, Late September, possibly between the 25th-30th. There's a lot of difference and controversy concerning when he was born, and when he died, but one thing I'll say about the whole thing -I'm glad that, after 3 days and 3 nights, he arose from the dead, and came out of the Tomb, victorious over death, hell, and the grave! He is the possessor of the keys of death and hell, and he lives forevermore!
@@ronaldshank7589 Possibly Yom Kippur.
@@JohnStark72 Seems like that would work, too. He certainly wasn't born in December. There's no way that that could be right. If Jesus was 33 1/2 when he was Crucified, and had been born in December, then he wouldn't have been Crucified until mid to late June. The math on the December birth doesn't work. I'm sticking with possibly sometime in September, as the Month in which Jesus was born.
Good video. But you missed a critical part of the puzzle on His birth. The priestly order Zechariah belongs to, actually matters because his order only served in the Temple in Feb, Mar, Apr, Aug, Sep, and Oct. This matters because he impregnated Elizabeth right after his service in the temple. Add to that, Elizabeth was six months pregnant by the time Mary came to visit, it becomes easier to lock down 6 possible months during the year. Also, the sheep argument is not irrelevant. How they bred their flocks is a tradition followed to this day. In Bethlehem, they introduce rams to the ewes at a certain time of year, so that they birth between November and March. That matters. Add to that, the shepherds only stayed out at night during that season in order to ensure the lambs were dried off properly during the cold nights. After March, they do not stay out.
Hello my brother - would you kindly let me have your email so I could get in touch with you, or a twitter/skype account? You've made some excellent points and if you could spare me a little time, I'd like to learn.
The lamb that was sacrificed at Easter was traditionally brought from Bethlehem.
So, in about 1980 or so I saw a presentation at our local planetarium that talked among other things about the birth of Jesus. They theorized that the Maji would have been reacting to an astronomical portent. The idea in this case was that one or more scientists had run a simulation of the motions of the solar system and found a conjunction of three planets which occurred in the spring of 6 BC. This is something the Maji, who were also the royal astronomers among other things, would have taken as extremely significant. The planetarium had one of 12 sophisticated Ziess sky projectors in the US that worked with complicated gearing to project the actual night sky with a high level of accuracy. They ran the planetary motion part of their projector back to 6 BC and sure enough there was the same conjunction. The theory was that this significant astronomical event might have convinced the Wise Men that something was up in the spring of 6 BC and that this planetary conjunction was the “star” they had followed.
That had been the story I heard as well.
Brad, now that you mention this, I too recall seeing this at the planetarium in the Denver Museum of Nature & Science in the early to mid 1980’s. Although viewed as less scientific, it would be interesting to see what a good vedic astrologer would say if they calculated charts to the same period. The other interesting thing is who where the Maji? Did they come via the Silk Road? Where they from India, Persia, China, Mongolia, etc? The more more we know about history, yet more that knowledge unfolds - it’s really marvelous, isn’t it?
But as Matt says in the video, I don't think the verse specifically says that the magi were there for the birth. They just came to visit some unspecified time after.
@@blackswanmtg I was musing in that context.
The issue with this, is using the same knowledge of stars we have now, a visible pulsar was known to have existed around 4bce, so whilst interesting, neither force the answer to be settled.
In Hebrew Sunday school we always talked about history. I always thought they were saying "before the common error." It wasn't until my late 20s that I learned it was "era" not "error."
Lol
Before Christ, Anno Domini (which means year of our Lord)
@@alexwilliamns lol I thought the same thing until I was 17
@@alexwilliamns Make it mean so! Tell everyone that you like your OJ a very donserly color, or something like that....
🤣🤣🤣
The service of Zechariah is a good place to start. His tour of duty in the Temple and the announcement of the conception of his son John gives us a very good estimation of when John the Baptizer was born. Zechariah was relieved of duty by the end of June which means he was home and impregnating his wife by July. Therefore John would have been born in the spring. He was six months older than his cousin Jesus which laces the birth of Jesus in the fall. The clue of the day is in the Gospel according to John when he states the Lord tabernacled among us. The feast of Tabernacles is the 15th of Tishri.
Other posters have made similar comments as yours which are far more credible than the video suggests. I'm surprised at his lack of deeper research into the matter from this perspective. Best wishes.
@@PageMarker1 The source is a scholarly paper that reviewed the entire birth narrative and the surrounding events. I found the part discussing the year in the video informative but the discussion of the actual day seemed to cater to modern scholars and not the people who actually witnessed the evernts and left written and oral accounts. Modern scholars discount thise sources. What is amazing is that I know people who are descendants of the family group that Jesus was born into.
@@1roanstephen - Are you able to elaborate on your last sentence? Fascinating!
@@cpk2GIRL I know a family that is descended from Jesus' extended family. They keep their lineage in mind from generation to generation. Their ancestor was a second cousin to Jesus. They are Orthodox Christians, Hebrews by descent but today they are called Palestinians.
ZacharYa'oh (Zechariah) is a fictional character along with Alay-Shabai (Elizabeth) created by Luke and his fellow gospel writers. There is no mention, nor any records given, including by Josephus to substantiate the existence of this person. Conversely, according to the prophets and Ya'ohshai himself, Ya'ohkhanan the immerser (John the Baptist) was none other than the prophet Al-Ya'oh (Elijah) who did not see death until his head was severed by Herod Antipas. So the whole story of his birth, and kinship to Ya'ohshai was to legitimize Ya'ohshai (now called Iesous by the Herodian Edomite Pharisee Paul) as High Priest as well as Savior. The problem is, only one from the tribe of Loay (Levi) and specifically the sons of Ahran (Aaron) through Tsadok (Zadok) can be High Priest. That is why the Maccabees were illegitimate in their claims to the position. And according to YashaiYa'oh (Isaiah) 43:11, only YA'OH (YHWH) Himself is Savior. Ya'ohshai (Jesus) is the Mashaykh (Messiah), but that just means he was anointed to perform the specific task of gathering the flocks of Ya'ohsharal (Israel) and returning them back to the covenant and true worship of YA'OH. Shalom.
Very enlightening video and I enjoyed it as well. You have a unique way of giving us the facts in an engaging way. Thank you for all of the work you put into it!
Considering the the Gospel of Luke was written in a time when the old people of the time would still remember the census, is it really reasonable to accept that he would've gotten such an important detail wrong? Aren't we committing the fallacy of "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"? Perhaps there was an earlier censes under Herod, and since the census was taken when Judea was an independent kingdom, it was not as controversial as the later census that was done for tax purposes? According to the gospel of Luke, there doesn't seem to be any controversy surrounding this census and people seems to have been very compliant, making it much less controversial and historically noteworthy than the later census?
Also, perhaps the reason why Joseph and Mary went down to Bethlehem is because he actually came from that town? He was visiting his fiancé, and when the news came, they moved down to Bethlehem because they assumed they would live there after the marriage. However, with the change of the political tides in Judea, he might have chosen to move the Galilee instead and raise the child in the town of his mother instead?
Many details in the New Testament that secular historians simply threw away and scoffed at was later proven accurate with new archeological discoveries. Since Luke lived a lot closer to the actual events than the secular historians of today, perhaps a more cautious answer of: "we don't have enough data" is a more prudent course of action than to just assume a historical error in the text?
For many cultures around the world, esp. at a time when 1/3 to 1/2 of all children died in their infant years, the actual date of birth was _not_ important. And in many cases, not even the exact year.
Sure, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But as far as we know, Quirinius became governor of Syria in 6 CE, 10 years after Herod's death. Just postulating a different census under Herod, in direct contradiction to Luke's words, isn't good scholarship either. If we acknowledge that Luke got something wrong, assuming he mixed up the two Herods and thought the census had taken place after the death of Herod the Great, instead of Herod Archelaus, is quite a bit more likely. (Also, _no_ census was popular in Judaea, regardless of reason.)
According to Luke, Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem because of the census (which is a dubious assertion in itself). We can think of a lot of other reasons why someone would travel that way, but that's not what the source says.
If we disregard the source, we're basically left with no other clue, so "we don't know" is the honest answer, yes. But that answer already assumes an error in the text.
@@varana I have done some more reading on the matter. One article is making the important distinction that Luke is not saying he was _governor_ in Syria, rather that he was _governing_ in Syria. It is also known that he was conducting military action against the Homonadensians in Syria between 12BC and 2AD, so it is safe to say that he was holding some kind of high office before becoming governor in 6 AD. We know the previous governor, Lucius Volusius Saturninus, only goverend for two years, so perhaps Luke opted to mention the more recognisable name instead. One theory, though quite speculative, hold that he might have been governor of Syria twice. The precedent for this theory is a tumbstone refering to a person being governor twice in Syria, but it is very fragmentory.
Also, the claim that Joseph traveled to Bethlehem for the sensus doea not seem to be that dubious after all:
Early in the twentieth century, a papyrus was discovered which contained an edict by G. Vibius Maximus, the Roman governor of Egypt, stating:
Since the enrollment by households is approaching, it is necessary to command all who for any reason are out of their own district to return to their own home, in order to perform the usual business of the taxation.
(Cobern, C.M. 1929. The New Archeological Discoveries and their Bearing upon the New Testament. New York and London: Funk & Wagnalls, p. 47; Unger, M.F. 1962. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, p. 64).
@@Hannodb1961 But mentioning the more memorable name is the issue. To a reader familiar with Jewish history, "the census when Quirinius was governing Syria" points to a very specific and famous date: 6 CE (or shortly after), the census after the death of Herod Archelaus, which led to a substantial revolt with long-lasting effects in Judaea. And assuming that Luke mentions a person who was not governor of Syria as governing Syria seems already a contradiction to me.
Quirinius held some form of office (either directly governor of Galatia, or at least military command) in Asia Minor in 5-3 BCE, and he later was councilor to Augustus' son Gaius. That he held important offices during that time, is not in doubt.
That papyrus refers to people having their home in town A but staying in town B at the moment, for whatever reason.
It does not mean that people would have to go to the home city of some distant ancestor (which one?), like Joseph. Luke says that he had to go to Bethlehem because he descended from David. That's a fundamentally different thing.
@@varana Not necesarilly. I'm not sure how much of the political details is known in Syria, but it is concievable that such details could explain why it would make more sense to mention the more well known person. For instance, about 10 years ago in my country, we had a political incident that lead to an interim president ruling for about 6 months. I bet most people have forgotten about that today, and in their mind, the next president succeeded the prior president directly. If people had to recall an event that took place during the rule of the interim president, they'd probably name the wrong president. Same with the soviet Union. I know there was two secratary generals between Breznev and Gorbachev, but since their rule was so short and inconsequential, I dont even bother to remember their names.
Now, we know the previous governer only ruled for two years. Why? Was he just a temporary appointment? Did he not hold the real power? I dont know. But based on the experience of our country's recent history, it does make sense to me that there could've been reasons why Luke decided to name the more famous person rather than the actual governor of the time.
Regarding Joseph, the Bible really doesnt give much information about him, but there is reason to believe that he actually grew up in Bethlehem, and that Mary lived in Nazareth. They probably met in Jerusalem during passover or some other feast. The reason why I say so is because in the Mathew account, we find Jesus in Bethlehem again, even though this took place 2 years after his birth. So clearly, Joseph must have had familial ties in Bethlehem. The exact details is uncertain, but the papirus from Egypt does give us little reason to doubt that Joseph had good reason to travel to Bethlehem for the census.
@@Hannodb1961 It seems that you are trying really hard to harmonize Mathew and Luke. Is it possible that the writers of Mathew and Luke are just mistaken?
The problem with BCE and CE is that they are even less meaningful than the traditional BC/AD (despite the discrepancies). I mean what makes the common era "common"? How is that distinct from the time before it? Just my thoughts.
Sui generis because because that dating system is commonly used.
You can compare it to moving away from defining the kilogram or meter by it's physical prototype towards aformula based on physical constants. Those units are and were in that sense always arbitrary.
And if BC and AD are not what they describe to be it does make sense to face the fact that the dating system is arbitrary, like with SI-Units we find formulas with physical constants that mimic the definition of the previous standard of unit for convenience.
My problem with BCE/CE system is that the 2 acronyms are too similar to each other and they can be confused for each other. BC/AD are completely different and not confusable with the 2 acronyms.
Also the common misconception is that BCE/CE is to remove Christianity from the calander even though the calender IS a Christian Calender. It's literally called the "Gregorian Calender". Which is named after Pope Gregory who modified the Julian Calender to fix the lip year problem.
@@modmaker7617 i got used to it pretty quickly. The only thing that throws me of occasionally is BC because my first inclination is to expect the following E 😅
That being said, i thought it is partially about religion. BC by itself would be fine, but with AD you principally force even non christians to call a figure Lord (Domini) even though it doesn't apply to them.
i'm still waiting for the scientific community to updating the naming of taxonomic ranking system of species / genus / family / order / class / phylum / etc.. if anything needs a nomenclature overhaul, it's that old headache-inducing system =_=
Just like Kelvin is the only sane temperature scale, the only sane date scale would start at big bang.
But that would be even less practical than using Kelvin in everyday life, so all the world's calendar systems use an arbitrary zero. The Jews called it "creation of the world", the Christians "birth of Jesus".
Anyway, absolute zero temperature is quite exactly known nowadays. Big bang is not, and besides the difficulties of handling unwieldy huge numbers, a calendar whose zero might be a few million years earlier or later isn't very practical.
What a great piece! After strong evidences, all of which ended with "no one really knows". I am a Catholic, by the way. Of course, I observe Christmas. But, it is also great to notice Jewish and Muslim holidays because they occur during important dates on how the sun and moon move.
their calendar is Lunisolar...Jesus died in the first full moon of the Spring...that day is Passover Nisan 14, that info is in the bible.
@@moisesbeyond , yeah. So that, Holy Week is movable using Gregorian Calendar.
How does Muslim holidays correspond to when sun or moon moves?
@@maganhassan2627 , as an example, during the month of Ramadan, Muslims are obliged to go on fasting from the sunrise, will remain the whole day, and will end at sunset. The start of each month in Muslim Calendar is always begin, literally, during the first sightings of the tiny uncovered part of the moon, immediately after the "New Moon" phase.
@@rodienp.feranco2249 u are right bro.
What a silly question! He was born on his birthday!!
hahahaha
Lord Jesus bless you David!
🙄
What a silly comment!!
So glad a new bible/religion came out, it's the most interesting series you've made, you always put so much effort in providing us with correct cultural content
Seriously. Useful Charts, Religion for Breakfast and Sam Aronow are answering all the questions I had as a kid reading the Bible.
@@Nwmguy the holy trinity
@@drgeorgek But which one is Celery, Green Pepper, and Onion?
@@drgeorgek holy Trinity is false, it's from catholic
@@redbitch3362 yeah I know. It's called a joke.
I was born and raised in Israel, I can confirm that winters in that area are mild, though beit lechem is quite high, so can get very cold at times, but also very hot, but it's more comfortable than summer where it's always way too hot
But sheep are out of the fields by September at the latest.
@@thoththeegyptian4445 it is in the same area, weather don't care for human borders
@@Nunya_Bidness_53 the fields only start to properly grow in September, Israeli winters are the time of year when everything comes back to life, animals go to hibernation through the summer there, cause it's so hot and dry
Israel??.. you mean Palestine?
@@arikenda let me check all the official papers and such....
Definitely Israel.
Great video brother! I can sleep now, thank you for covering a lot of questions and such a respectful video.
Pleasantly surprised by the evenhanded treatment of the subject matter. Also remarkable for comprehensive scope. Thanks!
For as many people mindlessly parrot the nonexistence of Quirinius and the absence of a Roman census it’s gratifying to see that the established Roman history can be understood and correlated to the events in question by a relatively disinterested party examining the internal chronology of the source texts.
At first I have to say that I love every single video on this channel. My only problem with your work is that I can’t find the sources of your videos. Maybe this is something only germans do (I am german an watch also a lot german history content on this platform), but I love to look at the sources. This gives me the chance to dive deeper into history and to work with the knowledge. It also solidifies your statements.
There are dozens of books written about the historicity of Jesus. You can just pick one up from your library.
The New Testament has multiple references to historical events and persons. What you are looking for are the stone inscriptions and Roman records that reference the same events and people. Historians take the pagan sources and their dates and compare them to the New Testament, which gives a range of dates for the references in the New Testament. Pontius Pilate, for instance, had numerous references in both inscriptions and records. So, the New Testament account of the execution of Jesus during his governorship means that it would have to have happened during the years he was governor according to these independent records. The same is true for references to king Herod at the birth or young age of Jesus, and the Roman census of Judea. There are independent records of the dates of Herod's reign and when the Judean census was conducted.
@@legisnuntius Thank you very much for the information. But to be honest, my question was not only directed at this video, but all videos on the channel. I am used to the sources being linked or at least mentioned in the description so that everyone can understand where the creators got their information from.
@@benniseiz3179 I agree. I wish he quoted his sources.
I also love to see sources listed but honestly I never check them. Haha😅
Always check everything you hear or read....never take what you hear as being fact. One thing I learnt as I started my journey with the Lord and I have found it the best advice I ever received. There are too many opinions out there with no scriptures to back them up
Shalom
Merry Chrismas Matt. I found this channel only recently and have found these charts and videos so interesting. I even made my own family tree on Ancestry and managed to trace my details back to the middle ages thanks to these videos. Yes I had to pause them and transfer all the names. Such an interesting subject.
Great job on a timely and challenging topic. Merry Christmas!
Matt, I love your sheep characters. I love Serta's sheep and love seeing them other places. Merry Christmas and/or Happy Hanukkah to you and your family.
The pictures are actually from Shaun the Sheep. Shaun the Sheep first appeared in the Wallace and Grommit film “A Close Shave”.
I always find your work so insightful and informative, thank you for that. Forgive me if you've covered this before, but I would love to see a video explaining the history of the worlds calendars and perhaps how we got to the Gregorian calendar today over other calendars still used throughout the world
It's basically a result of Europe being the first to colonize and thereby have influential power over the world. AD was just am alternative to the Roman system used that dated back to Christ instead of a certain emperor of Rome. Charlemagne being the first Holy Roman Emperor used the dating system, and those who came after him kept with the tradition. By the time of the Age of Exploration (Columbus, Magellan, etc.) it was the standard, so it spread over the world. The Gregorian system was just a fix for the calendar, because the Julian calendar was based on a year being 365.25 days, but the Gregorian calendar more accurately sets a year as 365.2425 days. Currently, I think a leap day needs to be skipped in the year 3000 or 4000 to keep the solstices from shifting dates over time, but the current calendar essentially doesn't change for many, many generations; whereas, under the Julian Calendar the solstices and equinoxes changed a day every four hundred years.
@@litigioussociety4249 The essence of the redating was the need to clarify the timeline of history, as Bishop Ussher's biblical dating had become untenable given the breakthroughs on cosmology and geology. For many years, that stopped at the Gregorian 11 days correction, with a degree of uncertainty recognised in the idea of "The Dark Ages" as late as the 1960s, which has now been dispelled. One very useful text, developing on the Deas Sea Scrolls data suggesting Essene roots, is Peter Cresswell's Jesus the Terrorist, connecting his circle to the Sicarii. That the Vatican suppressed the data for so long is utterly offensive to historians, and we're still far from solid on the cultural impact thirty years down the road as a result. We've seen a similar clarification of the Pharaonic Chronology as well in the last 50 years.
It would be interesting, though, to see how the Gregorian calendar compares to some others in use, e.g. the Jewish calendar and that used in Nepal.
If you know of any in which a week is a unit of something other than 7 days, even better!
@@leaaugusta9924 You're dealing with sight irregularities in the moon's orbit of the earth, defining the month, and the earth's orbit of the sun, defining the year, and it's own rotation, defining the day. The proportion of approximately 365.25 days, adjusting the length of the hour slightly homes in on that, so with the leap year system as a further adjustment, you're dealing with factors of 365, which are 5 and 73. One is slightly too short, the other far too long, and so the irregular month lengths became arbitrarily established.
The Mayan calendar, on the other hand, used a 20-day month, with 5 extra days interpolated.
@Rahere We asked Matt for a video on the topic, not mansplaining in the comments.
Good video. You probably are aware there was an error in your calendar graphics. Your graphic said "Spring Solstice" while you were correctly saying "Spring Equinox." Not a big deal just letting you know.
I realize this video is 2 years old but it's almost-Christmas-and-I-am-
Grateful-week so it's good timing. Well done as usual
Christian here, if you wonder about what date (Matthew or Luke) to pick, please remember that Matthew was a Tax Collector, while Luke was a doctor (one of his jobs was being a historian) so he had to be as accurate as possible with the dates and events he narrated.
Seeing some comments, I'll also add that Luke was the only one trying to write with a clear chronological order (since he was writing to a very important authority called "Teohpilus") while the others weren't focused on that, especially John.
@Nehemiah Scudder What evidence we have that the Gospel of Luke was plagiarized from Joseph?? It is true that Luke was no eyewitness, but he got his information from the eyewitnesses of Jesus. The problem with your statement is that you claim to Joseph wrote his book around 93 AD, But Scholars suggest that the Gospel of Luke was written around 85 AD. So something is off with your information.
Mate we don't even know who wrote them 🤣
@@redmattuk Who is said "we don't know who wrote them"?? Care to explain..
There is nothing in the Gospel of Matthew to indicate that someone named “Matthew” wrote it or that this is the “Matthew the tax collector.”
My biggest concern is that Rome has no documentation to say it ever required return to home towns for census, as is now, census is based on where you live, no questions.
There is the possibility that Joeseph was working 'illegally' and not declaring that he and his partner where working away from his declared address, but this would be unlikely and add more questions than it answers.
Both Matthew and Luke say they travelled to Bethlehem, so technically the information they do give that can't be verified could be assumed to be questionable.
I enjoyed and appreciate your work on this, especially how you laid out the timeline so well and cited sources.
I talked with some Atheists online and we came to an
interesting Result:
Atheists dont have this 'inherent desire to spread their word',
which of course is UNDERSTANDABLE buuut it also has negative side-effects,
evidend by Atheist-Channel generally being smaller than Theist-channel.
So i think we should all self-reflect and ask us if Atheists shouldnt recommend-each-other more often stuff.
@@slevinchannel7589 I am not an atheist. I self-describe as an agnostic panendeist. That said, I believe in an honest pursuit of truth and try to remain as open minded as possible. I also believe we get closer to truth by eliminating that which does not belong. Truth has nothing to fear from investigation.
Thank you Matt for such a great informative video. This is the first video I've ever watched on your channel and I can say it really enriched me a lot. Furthermore, I'm so pleased everyone in the comments section is so polite. It's been two days since Christmas but nonetheless, I want to wish everyone a merry Christmas. God bless you all!!! ✝️✝️✝️🙌🙌🙌
christians already has the tradition of december 25 decades before the romans began celebrating saturnalia. Hypolitus of Rome wrote about it in around 204 AD. The roman emperor declared the celebration 70 yrs later.
Really well done! Thank you for your work! God bless you and yours! ✝️
I went in here knowing historical contexts from various other videos stating the same dates and events mentioned also in this video. I'm glad you simplified everything. Although it was inconclusive, it sort of clarified when the possible date and time of year it may have happened. It's not out of curiosity, the algorithm led me far into a rabbit hole of related videos and I just wanted to see where it went.
I talked with some Atheists online and we came to an
interesting Result: Atheists dont have this 'inherent desire to spread their word',
which of course is UNDERSTANDABLE buuut it also has negative side-effects,
evidend by Atheist-Channel generally being smaller than Theist-channel.
So i think we should all self-reflect and ask us if Atheists shouldnt recommend-each-other more often stuff.
So i offer here and now some promised-to-be-good Atheist-RUclipsr,
and on that note, also Science-Channel.
I have always loved Bible History, and discussions. I grew up in the Golden Age of Sunday School, my Mom was Sunday School Superintendent, I attended every Sunday all through grade school, and taught it when I was older. I tried to incorporate history, like Josephas' writings into the lessons and most of the kids loved it.
I talked with some Atheists online and we came to an
interesting Result:
Atheists dont have this 'inherent desire to spread their word',
which of course is UNDERSTANDABLE buuut it also has negative side-effects,
evidend by Atheist-Channel generally being smaller than Theist-channel.
So i think we should all self-reflect and ask us if Atheists shouldnt recommend-each-other more often stuff.
So i offer here and now some promised-to-be-good Atheist-RUclipsr,
and on that note, also Science-Channel.
Leviticus44
“‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.
When I was in Sunday school I asked my teacher if they are lying to us about Santa in order to get us to be good are they also lying to us about Jesus and God for the same reasons needless to say it did not go over well.
Gee you have had an exciting life, how many kids would do anything to be allowed to attend Sunday school where some demented adult could push religion down their throats? this is where you initially learn about guilt, shame, paranoia, unworthiness and the penalty of being burned forevever for minor misdemeanors against the invisible Skydaddy with super powers.
In Daniel 9:20-27 is the 70-week prophecy. Vs 24: 70 weeks are determined for your people (70 weeks × 7 days a week = 490 days/years in Bible prophecy). Vs 25: know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem (457 BCE decree to rebuild Jerusalem found in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah). Until Messiah the Prince, there shall be 7 weeks and 62 weeks (69 weeks, 483 years the Messiah is annointed). From 457 BCE to 27 CE is 483 years. 27 CE Jesus was baptized and annointed by the Holy Spirit, and Jesus started His ministry. Vs 26: After the 62 weeks, Messiah shall be cut off but not for Himself, and vs 27: He shall confirm a covenant with many for one week (7 years) but in the middle of the week (3 1/2 years) He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. 31 CE Jesus was crucified, and the veil was torn from top to bottom, putting an end to sacrifice and offering (end of the first 3 1/2 years). Last 3 1/2 years end in 34 CE with the stoning of Stephen in Acts 7:54-60, which mirrors the death of Jesus in Luke 23:34-49. If God wanted us to know the exact birth of Jesus, I believe it would be in the Scriptures, but I do believe Jesus was born in 4 BCE and His first birthday was in 3 BCE and in 27 CE He was annointed which He would have been 30 years of age. I know that this is not in the Bible, but I enjoyed comparing Bible history with the history shared in this video.
There’s a theory that he was born in September, can’t remember how that came about. There was also a documentary that said there was a comet that was visible from Judaea at the time of his birth.
I think it was estimated on the dates Zacariah was in the temple that the angel informed him that his wife elizabeth will get pregnant, the time Mary visited Elizabeth who was 6 months pregnant ant that time. If Christ was born in September, then he must be conceived in December, that is 9 months before. Early Christians do not celebrate birthdays as the day one is born, but will celebrate the conception, like the feast on immaculate conception. .just tsken from a presentation. .
He was born on April 6. Modern revelation
Really fascinating video, I've always wondered this and its nice to have it explained and laid out so clearly!
Christ was born 6th of April, see above
Small fact check/extra information on the Passover reference at the end:
I understand that it's a graphic for easy reference, but for anyone that doesn't know, Passover is 8 days long and doesn't correspond to a specific day on the Gregorian calendar.
Consider not only the sheep, consider also the census during that time (Luk.2:2). No one in the right sense will do this in winter.
Also you can estimate the Birth Month of Lord Jesus Christ, by computing the time when he was born, by considering the birth also of John the Baptist, and when Zechariah father of John the Baptist when he Zechariah was serving at temple (Luk.1:22-24). You can count the month when was Lord Jesus Christ was born.
Jesus Was Born in Zero BC Using God Original CalendarBy Pastor Clarence Boykin, Jr.I am going to end the never-ending debate about when Jesus Christ was born.The scriptures said, prove everything in the mouth of 2 witnesses or 3 witnesses. There are 3 fiscal beginning calendar dates for the birth of Jesus Christ, each with their own Before Christ date (BC). St. Bede book entitled Ecclesiastical History of the English People was the first to use the term BC, and the AUC calendar, and the Anno Domini calendar (AD) together. In Chapter 2 he states, "Britain has never been visited by the Romans, and was, indeed, entirely unknown to them before the time of Caius Julius Caesar, who, in the year 693 after the building of Rome, (also known as ab urbe condita calendar AUC), but the sixtieth year before the incarnation of our Lord." Notice that there are no named days, months, dates, and season. From St. Bede perspective, the birth of Jesus Christ was common knowledge to those who was alive at the writing of his book. They knew from Sunday March 1, was in the year 693 AUC, but 60 years before the incarnation of our Lord was on Tuesday February 1, 693 AUC, and 60 years later Jesus Christ was born on Sunday February 1, 753 AUC and Sunday February 1, AD is 0 BC. Then St. Bede died on Monday October 26, AD 735 years later. Let’s go to the first calendar, God Original Calendar (GOC) come from the scriptures starting at Genesis 1:1. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:1-5 The first day was Sunday January 1, GOC and 3,642 years 1 months BC.Then Jesus Christ would be born on Sunday February 1, 3642 GOC. This is 0 BC and Sunday February 1, AD.Let’s go to the second calendar, After Israel come out of the land of Egypt (AEC) come from Exodus 12:1.And the Lord spoke unto Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt saying, This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you. Exodus 12:1God spoke to them on Saturday April 1, 2668 GOC and this became, Saturday April 1, AEC, and 973 years 10 months BC. Then, Jesus Christ was born on Sunday February 1, 973 AEC. This is 0 BC and Sunday February 1, AD.Get my book and learn much more!
Awesome video, I like that you took the time to explain the historical detail while still respecting the religious ones
Very interesting to see text analysis - additionally, if I remember correctly, one of my "explaining legends and myths" books said that there was also an analysis of what could have been the star of Bethlehem, and one version was a visible supernova in 4BCE.
I remember that story being told in the Hayden Planetarium in NYC about 1971.
I want them to explain the zombie apocalypse in Mathew
Apparently the ancients believed that the birth of great men was marked by exceptional events. Most probably the star is just a literary embellishment.
@@pansepot1490 perhaps the star event could have happened - just not necessarily at the exact year. I mean, when were the gospels written, 50+ years after? Think back a decade or so even now, you can probably easily remember something happening, for example, a solar eclipse, but exact year might have fallen out of memory.
4 BCE Supernova? Source?
Doing Bible study with a messianic Jew and he said that was around the end of September. Possible on the feast of Sukkot because every Jewish feasts of Jewish are related to Jesus ❤️
Would that include Hannukah as a Jewish feast? A feast regarding the freeing of Jerusalem and the Temple a feast similar to Sukkot, Hannukah which begins on the 25th day repeat 25th day you know 25th day of Chislev 25th day where have I heard 25th day before what day is Christmas oh yeah thats right 25th. Eight days later presentation in the Temple.
Meanwhile Hannukah festival of lights and John 1 presents the very fact that light has come into the world. If you were to take Hannukah 25th day of the ninth month and transpose that into the Julian calendar you would not choose the ninth month of the Julian calendar you would choose the month most closest to Chislev. That would be December.
So here we are Hannukah beginning on the 25h day of Chislev roughly our December and Jesus was born on the 25th.
Then the fact that in Egypt prior to 300AD they were celebrating the birth of Jesus the Christ according to their calendar system, they celebrated in roughly our March. The thing with this is that they the Egyptian celebrated the birth of Jesus Christ in the 25th day of the 9th month of their calendar.
Facts Jesus Christ was not born in the Julian calendar he was born in the Jewish calendar. 25th day 9th month. Transferred to the December 25th in the Julian Calendar and transferred into the Egyptian calendar prior to 300AD as their 25th day of the 9th month.
He was born on April 1st.
@@earthorigins3509 the first day of the month of Nisan. The true Jewish new year. But that was actually the 20th of March in 6bc
Shalom all,
I'd like to add more to this discussion that may shine another element of historical light on this crucial point. I read each comment and did not see anyone point out that the "Jewish" calendar (Nisan- Adar) is a mathematical invention and not "YaHoVahs" calendar. Exodus 12:2 & Deu. 16:1 let us know that YaHoVah has a calendar that was established in Gen 1:14 that He reminds us to "guard." The talmud lets us know that the last act of the Sanhedrin in the year 359 CE Hillel 2nd instituted the calculated "Jewish" calendar before disbanding into the diaspora, as to keep Jews all over the world on the same calendar. So yes @user-sn3gr9zi7j messianic friend is correct about Sukkot.
Josephus 17:167 tells us Herod had 2 rabbis burned alive on Jan 10, 1 BCE and was less than a month after the order to kill all male circumcised children in Bethlehem. Herod had Antipater executed and leaves his son Archelaus to rule Judea and Herod dies 5 days after Antipater. Archelaus mourns Herod's death 7 days and then slaughters 3000 Pharaisees on the Temple mount of which he's called to Rome for said actions. A rebellion resulted in Judaea which General Varus is called from Syria to Judaea to quash.
These facts let us know that Herod called for the killing of the children in Bethlehem 2 years old or younger "according to the time he diligently inquired of the magi." Matt 2:16. So "the great sign in the heavens" had to have appeared 1-2 years before the execution of the children in Bethlehem, hence Yeshua had to of been born in the year 3-2 BCE 1-2 years before Herod's death. There is not another lunar eclipse in a 10 year time frame that fits all biblical, Roman and astronomical records. Lk 3:23 confirms "Yeshua nearing but not yet having reached 30 years of age." All this to say Yeshua was born on the 15th day of the 7th month, the High Sabbath of Sukkot, Thursday, Sep. 26th, 3 BCE. John 1:14 & Lk 2:7-20. Subsequently circumcised 22nd Day of the 7th month, Thursday Oct 3, 3 BCE Lk 2:21. Now knowing this we can calculate His death on Passover 14th Day of 1st month (Aviv) Wednesday, April 28, 28 CE and resurrection 3 days & 3 nights later Matt 12:40, before sunset on the weekly Sabbath 17th Day of Aviv, May 1, 28 CE.
Of course all of these dates correspond exactly with the timing given in Lev 23 as well as other corresponding scriptures....and what else should we expect from our perfect Creator??? Precise precision and nothing else. I pray this helps clear up any confusion. Additionally this chronology also gives us precise understanding of Daniel ch 9 as well.
Shalom Brent
Thank you. What about the way he’s represented as a fair man. When biblically he’s described otherwise? This is something that’s vexed my spirit more so in recent times.
I absolutely went through school being told that AD meant after death and it never sat well with me simply because nobody had a definitive date but somehow had definitive dates for BC, before Christ lol, as they said 🙄
BC events being well-documented
I guess it also doesn’t help our man never got married, had children, nor owned property
Those leave records of your existence
What an elusive dude
Jesus was walking along the path when HE was asked “how old are you”
Jesus said well on MY Mother’s side I’m 30 years old but on MY FATHER’s side I AM. (Eternal) The ancient of days! 😇
THE WORD (YHVH) made human.
Here are to potential explanations for everyone about this "contradiction"
The Greek word for “first” in Luke 2:2 is a form of the word protos and can be translated “before.” Thus Luke 2:2 could actually be translated, “This was the census taken before Quirinius was governor of Syria.”
Also, Quirinius actually ruled Syria on two separate occasions, and there were actually two censuses taken. The “first census” mentioned in Luke 2:2 occurred during Quirinius’ first term as governor, and another during his second term. The second census is mentioned in Acts 5:37 and probably took place between AD 6 and 7 (Josephus links this census to an uprising led by Judas of Galilee). Luke was the author of both the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts, and his goal was to write “an orderly account” (Luke 1:3). It seems that Luke did write a careful, orderly account: he mentions two censuses, and it was during the first one that Jesus was born. It would be unlikely for such a meticulous historian to make a blatant mistake in his timeline of events.
The second explanation is the most accurate probably.
I am not so sure I would call Luke "a meticulous historian." Meticulous historians like we have in the modern day did not exist back then; back in Luke's day a meticulous historian could completely make up a speech, an event or a genealogy simply because it showed some greater theme about the person that was "true." Luke and the other gospel writers are doing this just as much as any other ancient writer. For example, he basically constructs a genealogy for Jesus. Attempting to reconcile the gospel is a futile task. They are unreconcilable because a lot of the story is constructed from memory and simply out of whole cloth. Any credible historian or religious scholar will tell you the same thing, even if they are believers. If you want to believe that is fantastic! But you will just have to live with the contradictions as they are abounding and cannot be assuaged.
But, more importantly, to your historical error. Quirinius was not governor of Syria twice. He was appointed legate of Syria in 6 CE, true. However, during the years around 6-4 BCE he was likely a legate in Galatia, and he was essentially in that area for over a decade. There is no way he was somehow able to be a legate in Syria during the same time period. If you have evidence otherwise, I would love to see it. :-)
@@JonathanMartin884 You said a lot of incorrect things about that Geneology, if you simply read the Bible those names are collected. But to each his own sir. I provided all information I know. You can't prove he wasn't, it's Josepheus word over the Gospels and I choose the side of the Gospel of Luke as more credible as there is no way the early church fathers would've approved it otherwise. Most conservative Bible scholars today take a this view, namely, that Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), through David’s son Nathan. Since there was no specific Koine Greek word for “son-in-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter. Through either Mary’s or Joseph’s line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23). You can look into it though. Thank you for your comment.
@@demontejohnson4102 Yes, I've heard all the bad excuses and arguments about this. How can it be Mary's lineage when Luke explicitly says it's Joseph's lineage? If Luke intended to do something as unique and controversial as giving Mary's lineage it is very interesting that he does not note it. Especially since he is some kind of "meticulous historian" according to you. That is not history, that is belief. That would never fly with anyone other than Jesus, but because of the emotions surrounding belief in Jesus, it is basically taken as gospel (pun intended). If I told you that any other person had two genealogies you would almost assuredly think one or both were constructed rather than trying to reconcile what are clearly unreconcilable. Constantine, for example, claims he is related to Claudius Gothicus, and while it is possible there is not a single historian who deems it plausible. This is the same for most constructed lineages; Jesus is not special.
When it comes to Quirinus, I am not going off of just Josephus, I am going off of Tacitus and Strabo and Pliny and several others. Everyone says he was in Galatia throughout the last decade of the 1st century BCE. There is not a single credible piece of evidence to show he was not there. Luke himself doesn't even say what you want him to say, you are extrapolating the conclusion you want from the scant evidence you have. Is it possible that he went from Galatia to Syria at some point in the middle of the decade? Sure, I guess it's possible. But other than you really wanting it to happen, it is not plausible. It is just as plausible as anything else that has zero evidence.
Credible historians need proof of things, you are making an argument from lack of evidence. There is nothing to suggest he was governor of Syria twice, there is nothing to suggest he was even in Syria from 4-6 BCE, and there are very few secular historians who even want to try and reconcile the gospels. It is a futile operation based solely on belief. If you want to do that, that's fine, but passing it off as credible history is disingenuous.
There is absolutely no evidence at all to suggest Quirinus was governor of Syria twice. In fact, we have evidence to the contrary, as we know he was conducting a military campaign in Galatia until it's conclusion around 3-1BCE.
Until this campaign was completed he did not yet hold the prerequisite titles or experience to be made Legate of Syria. As Galatia is considered a seperate area to Syria, his powers, like being able to conduct a census, would not extend to this region at all either.
There is also no evidence whatsoever that a "first" census of Quirinus was taken in BCE. One could make the incredibly decietful argument that a census was taken and subsequently lost, but the problem here is, the census supposedly required the entire empire to travel back to their ancestral homeland, the economic impact of which could not be lost in record.
We also know that Roman censuses were taken for reason of taxes, this means not only is the act of traveling entirely counter productive but as Judea was not annexed until 6CE, there would be no need to take a census and it would not be considered part of the Empire.
"Peace on me the day I(Jesus) was born, and the day I'll die, and the day I shall be raised alive!"
(Quran - 19 : 33)
Q 9:29
_Convert or pay jizyah or d i e_
Q9:29 is about christians and jews( people of books) and Q9:5 is about polytheists. _Your gawd thinks followers of jesus and moses are disbelievers_
These are good quality videos, thank you. I'm a Catholic -practicing Catholic. I'll add some thoughts here. Our liturgy often reflects seasons...we place major feast at times of year that teach theological ideas. Good Friday/ Easter is in the spring is because that is when Jesus died and rose to life again. Spring is a time of re-birth and new life and new hope. All Souls Day is in November because the year is dying and the liturgy at that time reflects on our deaths and the end times. Similarly December 22-25 is the darkest time of year so when we place the liturgical celebration of the birth of Jesus there it is because it teaches us the a new light shone into humanity during our darkness and coldness of our hearts. So we don't get too hung up on exact dates....thought there were very early Christian writers who say he was born Dec. 25, notable one was St. Ephrem of Syria. Also there is an excellent documentary made by an amateur astronomer about the star of Bethlehem that makes a very convincing case Jesus was born in 2 BC in about May and the Magi arrived on...Dec. 25, making that the first 'Christmas' when gifts were given to the child. Very compelling evidence put forward about the events we know happened in the sky at that time, I'd encourage everyone to find and watch his video.
I used to be skeptical about the theory that great people usually died around the day of their birth.
Strangely, both my parents died approximately within a week of their birth days.
Were my parents great persons? Being both down-to-earth persons, they strived to live simply, honestly and uprightly, thereby imparting these same values to us, their children. Hence, I personally consider both of them 'great'!
My father was not a great person, he died 1 week from his birthday.
My mom died on her birthday.
good riddance that father died@@TheGangstaNunOnTheRun
My dad died in September and was born in May. I guess he wasn't a great man.
The theory presented in the video is that great people die around the date of their CONCEPTION. Which is 9 months before their birthday (or less months if premature).
Matt, you should definitely do a similar account about the year and the day of Jesus’ death. Maybe for next Easter?
Especially with the 2000 year anniversary coming up (sometime)!
Jesus died at the Passover. It was a Wednesday. Passover is the 15th day after the solar new year which is the spring equinox.
@@bluesky6985 We must forget Christians and think of the jews.God and the Jewish calendar. I think this mess of dates was done on purpose by God.Go with the Jewish point of view maybe 🤔.God is mostly symbols. SO PASSOVER is my pick.🌠
@@charlemagnetheFranks There are 12 tribes of Israel not just the tribe of Judah
@@bluesky6985 I said Passover which all tribes follow. What else did I say to confuse you to think that I didn't know 12 tribes?
I read once that the courses of the Jewish priests were regularly scheduled and that verse tells you the course he was in. You can find the time of year his father would have been in the temple, thats John's conception season. Jesus is said to be 6 months younger I believe. They mother's were pregnant at the same time. That gets you to the zodiac sign at least. Which would be interesting to know.
Something to look into. Love your channel!
Zodiac? Do you thing Jesus believe in Zodiac sign?
@@daddada2984 Zodiac signs are a Greek thing, Eastern rome was hellenic primarily, Jesus spoke Greek. I would guess yes, he did believe in Zodiac signs. However, Zodiac signs within the Hellenic and then judeo-hellenic religions werent what modern people make them out to be.
@@RoderickVI do you think, Jesus teachings align with Zodiac sign? Does the stars & planet what bearing to your eternal life?
Where is Jesus or apostles teach about zodiac sign?
@@RoderickVI Jesus probably spoke Aramaic, not Greek.
While I do find it unlikely that Jesus believed in Zodiac signs or any beliefs associated with them, he may have had some idea about them. Besides that, Jesus probably did speak some Greek, considering how hellenized the Roman East was.
Very good outline involving many dates I had not been aware of. Your discussion raises a question I have had for years. If the year of the census is known taking Mary too Bethlehem, shouldn't we also know the time of year? Such travel would never occur during December. More likely late spring early summer. December has never made sense to me.
Excellent video as always! Merry Christmass to every one!
Fascinating! I'm always eager to hear different analogies on the time of Christ's birth.
I, myself, have a theory and I believe He was conceived in December and was born in September which is nine months.
I believe the star was His coming to earth through conception and it took the Kings two years to travel to Judea from the East.
Jesus was Born on 9/29.
He was Conceived on 12/25.
I have been shown great information about this.
"I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me."J.S.-History
Helaman 14 reads "
And now it came to pass that Samuel, the Lamanite, did prophesy a great many more things which cannot be written. 2 And behold, he said unto them: Behold, I give unto you a sign; for five years more cometh, and behold, then cometh the Son of God to redeem all those who shall believe on his name. 3 And behold, this will I give unto you for a sign at the time of his coming; for behold, there shall be great lights in heaven, insomuch that in the night before he cometh there shall be no darkness, insomuch that it shall appear unto man as if it was day. 4 Therefore, there shall be one day and a night and a day, as if it were one day and there were no night; and this shall be unto you for a sign; for ye shall know of the rising of the sun and also of its setting; therefore they shall know of a surety that there shall be two days and a night; nevertheless the night shall not be darkened; and it shall be the night before he is born. 5 And behold, there shall a new star arise, such an one as ye never have beheld; and this also shall be a sign unto you. 6 And behold this is not all, there shall be many signs and wonders in heaven. 7 And it shall come to pass that ye shall all be amazed, and wonder, insomuch that ye shall fall to the earth. 8 And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall believe on the Son of God, the same shall have everlasting life..."
I love thinking about new stars and pillars of light and great lights in the heavens in connections with the Savior's birth. A solar storm could cause "northern" lights anywhere. Aurora borealis would definitely count for great lights for someone who never saw them.
I love talking about Him because He is the great light of the world!
April 6
@@pkmr5284 I see one argument against this theory. Luke says that "all went to be enrolled, each to his own town". I doubt the enrollment would happen during sowing or harvesting periods as it would lead to lower crops = less food = starvation. The September-October is the time to harvest wheat...
I'm personally more keen towards early summer (June?) when weather is good enough to do a long trip and the moment doesn't affect farmers' work.
This is a very good and concise video on the dating, but there is one thing you left out. I wish you had included the full range of Quirinius' governorship, rather than JUST the year of the most significant census. It is possible that that's the census in question; it's also possible that there's a different census that happened earlier but the records haven't been found.
EDIT: Or at the very least the video makes it sound like he had already been governor of Syria for some time, rather than being appointed as governor when Archelaus is removed.
The Roman Empire kept VERY good records during that time. If there was another census on the scale of the first one, we would likely know about it. Based on Mathew's account it would also seem much more likely the documented census would be correct one as it would be closer in time to Mathew's account. They would have both been writing about a birth in an estimated date close to one another.
You realize that the entire story of his birth is pure fiction right? They needed to have a reason for Jesus of Nazareth to be born in Bethlehem, in order to fit the prophecy that Christ would be born in Bethlehem. A census is used to determine how many people CURRENTLY live in each city for taxation and dispensation purposes. Nobody returns to their hometown for a census, since that would destroy the entire purpose of the thing. It’s just an excuse someone invented to fit Jesus into being born in Bethlehem.
@@roems6396 That makes sense
@@roems6396 " Nobody returns to their hometown for a census, since that would destroy the entire purpose of the thing. It’s just an excuse someone invented to fit Jesus into being born in Bethlehem."
OR it could've been that the Jews (since Kings like Solomon and David) ALSO did census, they Jews acted based on how the census were made.
After all, for the 12 tribes it was very important to be in your hometown in any census because the census kept track for each individual tribe, rather than region and only the people from each tribe counted (example: if you were born in Judea and lived on Ephraim, you would have to move back to Judea for the census since it kept track of Jews especifically, not how many were actually living in there) so it's very likely the Jews actually moved back to their houses.
I have found some information on Quirinius you might be interested in:
Quirinius was appointed legate of Syria (i.e. governor) around 6 CE in order to oversee the formation of the newly created province of Iudaea, which included Judea. This new 'province' was to be part of Syria.
( The 'province' of judea would not be a Roman Province in the technical sense for another ~130 years. Additionally, the terms translated as governor when concerning Quirinius in Syria, and when concerning say Pontius Pilate in Judea are not the same. They are Legate and Prefect respectively, which are significantly different positions. )
Syria Palaestina (a renamed Iudaea) would eventually separate from the rest of Syria after numerous revolts made emperor Hadrian station an entire extra legion in the area.
The census was for the 15th Jubilee of the founding of Rome at April 21, 753 BC. They timed it for the feast of tabernacles where each tribe goes back to their ancestral home
Since you are planning to do a video on who wrote the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith thought Jesus was born on April 6, which was why he started his church on that date.
Which is true. The prophet Joseph translated the Book of Mormon
So day 1.
I just stumbled onto this, and I'm glad I did. Very well presented and interesting video. Your chart made a complicated subject quite easy to take in.
Other then the laughable assertion that the reason folk avoid using BC/AD is because they don't know the exact year of the birth of Jesus, rather than the attempt to ignore or hide the actual personage of Jesus, this was a great breakdown of the known facts about the year of his birth.
As for the sheep, there is a more accurate argument about sheep being in the field, which means it had to happen after harvest, and after the poor people were allowed to glean the fields post harvest.
There is zero reason for the sheep to be in the fields from planting season till after harvest. During that time they were kept further away. No sheepherder wanted or wants to pay for a half eaten field of wheat.
This usually points to a Septemberish date for the birth of Jesus.
Fences HAD been invented by then.
@@suzannehartmann946 and they were 1-2 foot thick, stacked stone. No one was building a wall around their fields. On occasion some overnight corrals were built out in the middle of nowhere, and if they were lucky, the butcher might have a small holding pen.
It was the sheepherders responsibility to keep the sheep out of the fields, there was little room for "accidents".
It could literally mean the livelihood of the sheepherder and her family if she messed up and did not control the sheep.
Only Christians could play the victim so hard to believe that historians hate them that much.
@@matthewvandeventer3632 Only an ignoramus would make such an assertion.
Of course. The forces that should not be always cover up, obfuscate and/or bury the truth.
good historical insight! in my humble opinion, Jesus was born on the Feast of The Tabernacles. Around September to October.
You got everything right, but missed out the most trustworthy indication: "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar [...]" (Lk 3:1) "Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age" (Lk 3:23)
Nice to know that Luke only knew "about" how old Jesus was. That means that early Christians did not worship his conception day nor his womb-exit day. I wonder when was Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua's circumcision day, and when if that fleshy body ascended into supernatural energy and re-joined the rest of his body. Sorry if I take religion too seriously/realistically for most mere self-soothers.
@@letsomethingshine You can see how the first generation of Christians thought about his birth from Gal 4:4
"God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law"
That's all.
Imo I think that the census story was Luke's attempt to find an explanation on why Jesus was born in Bethlehem. It would make more sense to me if he was born near the Passover because it was common to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem then, and the "no room in the inn" would be because everyone was in the area for passover. Bethlehem is 5 miles from the old city, so to me this is the best explanation.
I think both Luke and Matthew were *both* independently trying to come up with a reason why Jesus, known to have grown up in Nazareth, was born in Bethlehem. Matthew says that they _used_ to live in Bethlehem, but were forced to flee by Herod when Jesus was a toddler, first to Egypt and then later to Nazareth. Luke says they _normally_ lived in Nazareth, but temporarily travelled to Bethlehem for a census when Jesus was born. I think the most likely answer is that Jesus was just born in Nazareth, where he grew up, and where all his extended family was born and grew up.
@@rambling964 Only problem with that explanation is that later in life he had a lot of acquaintances among wealthy people from Jerusalem and suburbs. How could he have gotten to know these people if he grew up in Nazaret (a town that is btw not even mentioned in Josephus' list of towns in Galilee), and only visited Jerusalem once as an adult and only was in town for a few days before he was apprehended and executed?
@@wncjan that's an interesting question, but one I'm not sure is answered by him having lived in Bethlehem until he was a toddler (or, re:Luke, having spent a few nights there). Can you go into more detail about your theory?
You're absolutely wrong because Passover is the first festival on the sacred calendar and it begins in spring, not fall.
@@decepticonxhunter4850 I agree that Passover is in the spring, but what has that yo do with when and where Jesus was born?
1:52 - “...born before He was born”. - Exactly.
In the beginning was the Word: and the Word was with God: and the Word was God……
𝕐𝕖𝕤
I have it that the Catholic Church set Dec 25 to supplant the pagan ritual of winter solstice in Germany, Just as All Saint's Day (Nov 1) was put in place to supplant the Druid night of the dead in the UK.
the bible gives us Jesus age at the time of his death - 33 1/2 years old. count back 6 months from the time of his death, and you land around october, which would still have allowed for the shepherds to have been in the fields with their flocks.
Close - September 21st roughly...
Even as an atheist, stuff like this is just so fascinating to learn about
Even though I was brought up a Christian, I would call myself spiritual now. But I now know that the religions were made up to cause confusion/wars etc.. if Christians was to spend more time researching outside of the bible they would no about "The council of Nicea" regarding a meeting to discuss how to make jesus the sun of god and about Constantine and how he became the face of jesus and that jesus is just another worshipped deity in our timeline.
but yes..its fascinating how they come up with all these without no documentation or family tree from mary and Joseph etc
That's funny. Why would an atheist have any interest at all in what year Jesus was born? Do not atheist disbelieve in Jesus at all? No criticism here, but it seems odd.
@@megadavis5377 not all atheists believe the same thing. The only shared trait is a lack of a belief in God or gods. Personally, I think there could have been a historical person or people that the story of Jesus in the Bible were based on, but I also enjoy learning about this stuff in the same way I enjoy learning about Greek or Roman mythology.
@@megadavis5377 im an atheist l, but i too fiind it interesting
I am an atheist to. Jebus may have been a real human or a number of people written about and stories collected in one book but jebus could not have been his name. I just dont believe in any god. You are almost atheist too you just believe in one of the many gods invented. But the rest are just silly made up nonsense right!
Nothing wrong with an interest in history
I Denmark he's born on the 24th. of december.
In Denmark, we do not celebrate the birth of Jesus.
Christmas dates back to Viking times, when they held a week-long celebration around the winter solstice. We are not Vikings anymore but we eat like them, lots of pork
They can't even agree when Jesus was born.
Your animations are awesome. I hope one day I could make those.
As religious person. I really respect this explanation and kinda interesting. Ofcourse the exact date for Jesus born is remain unknown. But considering Jesus was born in non-royal society which sometimes ignored by historical writing. Those evidences maybe the best or the most accurate that we have to know the range time for the birth of Jesus.
religion is a scam , and if you believe in it thats very heartwarming but you been had. i notice people are starting to realize this, i love christman for its tradition of family gathering and gifts giving but religion is all bu.....t.
@@littlebigjohn69 scam is if you joined pyramid scheme. Religious is just way of life, not a fake cryptos, unless you were scammed by certain man within church . Every person has right to choose their family value, education institution nor community. If you plane would crash, we will think the same : hope for miracle. Unless you're have homelander's power
@@user-lr6hw4dq4t listen if you feel comfortable in your belief that is great but my issue is how religion has robbed of peoples money to control their power over everyone. if you believe a guy in the clouds is watching everyone your hallucinating and dillusional thinking. religion is not a way of life maybe to some uneducated person who will believe in anything and is threthen with his insucurity in life. Now some people are waking up to this scam and are questioning the truth and finding that this is the 21 st century not the 1400 . As an open minded person with some normality if their is a god he must be a horrible person to let wars go on and let little kids just born to have painful diseases in hospitals. Watch GEORGE CARLIN talk about religion he puts everything in perspective.
If we think about how much money goverments have used to build pointless buildings (churches and so on...) ye its a scam. all that money could have cured cancer
@@littlebigjohn69 im not hallucinating bcs I an't using weed and aware my choice. So do you figured out why so many mental illness in 21st century while humanity reaching its peak regarding quality of life? I dont force atheist to believe in God, but you guys just offensive everywhere ruining how people choose the way of their lives. You must be gratefull if you're living in country free from wars or natural disaster, but how about the peoples who don't have luxury like yours? If your govt is perfect, you wont need religious social services for those who're need. Theist people still doing better when it comes to social services, just let them be. Even every govt backed humantarian aid have political intention such how EU did for doing dirty things through 3rd world partners. People like you just see the world only as black or white without any spectrum. I simply giving my respect to this videos bcs its scientific approach and dont care about your skepticism. Im just stoic guy doing my life and try to educate my children in certain way.
Quirinius was twice governor, first time 3-2 BCE. Herod died Spring 1 BCE (Lunar eclipse Jan 10, 01 BCE, 4 BCE was only a partial). announcement to Mary during Hanukkah, which starts on the 25 of the month. Jesus born Sep 11, 03 BCE - the Great Sign of Revelation 12:1-2. Jupiter (Tzedek) with Regulus (Melek) of Leo (Ariyeh) above Vergo (the virgin)
Source for Quirinius being governor twice?
@@UsefulCharts His buttocks.
These dates have been debunked. Herod did die in spring 4 B.C.
amen kotobian tadau Krismas / merry Christmas 2022 & happy new year 2023, love from Sabah (Borneo), Malaysia.
I love your channel, I have learn so much thanks to your videos. I'm Mexican and the reason we were told why the Catholic Church chose to celebrate the birth of Jesus the day we celebrate it is that around the day the first priests arrived in Mexico they realized the native people had a celebration of the birth of the sun. The people celebrated for 9 days with music and food every night and the last day was December 24 at midnight . Overtime the Catholic Church to make the natives believe in Jesus combined this festivity with the birth of Jesus. The Catholic Church then celedreted the birth of Jesus December 25. This is the story of how the Mexican Posadas started, the celebration of the birth of Jesus that begins the night of December 16, and ends the midnight of December 24.
La Navidad se celebra el 25 de diciembre desde antes de la conquista. Más bien los nativos americanos empezaron a utilizar la liturgia católica mezclada con la propia resultando en el sincretismo existente.
But do you guys really celebrate the birth of the sun. What tradition is that
Quirinius was governor a Syria at an earlier point. The governorship in 6 CE was his second. This information can be found in Strabo and the works of Ramsey. It's a fascinating study and well worth the time and effort.
No he wasn't, this is lazy nonsense by Christian apologists. He was fighting a war between 11-3 BC. They have to try to con people with rhis because otherwise Luke is talking nonsense. Luke gets the date of the Census right, 6CE.
@@paulfell4962 Strabo was a Christian apologist? Emil Schurer, a Jew, was a Christian apologist? Suetonius was a Christian apologist? Ramsey, the archeologist, was a Christian apologist? Ramsey, the one who dug up entire cities, I would hardly call him lazy. The true lazy ones are those who read Luke and Matthew and conclude they are at odds and don't do any further study.
@@johnmillett2831 And the true buffoons are those who believe in a previous governorship when it didn't happen. Thew guy who put this piece together didn't mention a previous governorship, that's because it didn't happen.
@@paulfell4962 I follow the evidence. If you feel smarter for not doing so, that is your choice.
@@johnmillett2831 Your problem is you'retryimg to look atthis book as a history book, it isn't. He wasn't Governor twice & Christian apologists have tried to use Luke meant "Protector" not Governor. Just admit it, the Gospels are contradictory nonsense of a supernatural legend & anyone one believes this "story" without evidence is embarrassing themselves.
Great history lesson and one which as a Roman Catholic I also have no difficulty appreciating. As we are still in the Christmas season and hopefully still not to late
Happy Hanukkah
and
Merry Christmas. 🙋👪🤱
As a Christian, I like this video, Keep it up!
Just got home from a long Christmas Eve in London, it was lovely but we're absolutely shattered, needed a video of yours I was waiting for Matt😀
what how you posted this at like 4
@@Chiron1010 yes but still a long day lmao it was to go ice skating early in the morning
Very interesting and enjoyable presentation. I have tried to piece this together myself and it was above my abilities and knowledge. This was an excellent review of the known and unknown details.
no, the entire world is the same, even the churches of it and the person who made this video too. They no more understand John 4 about spirt and truth than they do the great prophet Jeremiah in chapter 16 and his revelation of the “inherited lies of the gentiles”.
It’s really this simple; spiritual discernment is not derived from the intellect of a fleshly mind. If it was that then all the worldly wise men would know and perceive it, including the evil and unrighteous ones.
No, It is solely a gift and revelation from God to those who sought and found him with a sincerely true and open heart. After all, He knows the heart, He tries the reigns. Or perhaps people forgot that His thoughts are higher than our thoughts, and His ways are higher than our ways?
As scripture does reveal, “they hear the world and they know the world, and the world knows them, but we are of the Spirit, they neither hear nor know us”.
You see, until the return of our Lord with his Kingdom, this world is satan’s kingdom and all the fleshly activities from the hands of sin; which every person possesses, is of it and serve his will and purpose. It’s why we have no works to boast of, no matter how well the intention. So much is still without understanding.
Is it your desire to know when the Lord was born? Start in John:
1:1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1:14 … and the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us.
Though depending on which translation you’re reading it may not be the same words; the subtlety of satan’s deceit. At least this video does expose one of the many cultural deceits regarding the wise men at the nativity. I often wonder if people understand that it’s approx. 80 miles from Galilee to Bethlehem and there were no cars, airplanes, or buses. Does it really make sense that a man walking and leading a donkey carrying a woman right at the end of her trimester period would take such a journey through the mountains in winter? No it doesn’t make any more sense than being blind of that which is right before your face and deaf of that which is sounding in your very ear.
How does that happen? Yet none question it, they readily go along with the cultural doctrine of men just as they were told and taught. Certainly not doing as they were commanded; to take heed that no man deceive them. Yet understand all are deceived, which is why we’re commanded to come out from the land of Babylon.
Wouldn’t it make a lot more sense for such a trip to occur after the final fruits of the harvest are gathered and put away in the barn with the time to rest afterward as was the practice in an agrarian society? Do you know and understand the law and the feasts of the Lord?
Probably not, because again the doctrine of men would have you believe that such things were nailed to the cross and done away with. Yet what did He say, “I came not to destroy, but to fulfill; the law and the prophets”. And in another place, “the law, the prophets, and the psalms”. Yet the ear of today is just as deaf to the prophet now as it was back then.
So ask yourself then; because most people likely never have despite reading the words over and over again, when does the Word, or anything for that matter, become flesh? As per Rev 19; “and His name is called; The Word of God.”
Under the law, do you know what the 15th day of the 7th month is? Because it’s in scripture over and over again. It might be considered to make an effort to both know and understand each and every reference. Just as many other such situations that are just as covered up and hidden.
And under the law, what comes on the 8th day after the birth of a male child and it becoming flesh? Is it not the circumcision? Who among us has the eye to see and the ear to hear?
And if you can discern when that day occurred, then count back 9 months (273 days) and where does it land? Because that’s what was celebrated originally; the overshadowing by the Lord. But you can thank the doctrine of men and their hands of sin works from ~1700 years ago for covering these things up. Yet Paul himself said, it was already at work long before then.
It all hinges on this: Matthew 27:50-52; who were they, where did they come from, and where did they go? I would suggest that it was the greatest conspiracy to deny the truth that has ever occurred on this world. Let the words that follow below as found in scripture be a sign unto you:
1. Why did Paul lament over his day and night teachings for three years?
2. Why did Jesus say, “and then I will profess to them; I never knew you, depart from me, ye who work iniquity”?
3. Who is mystery Babylon, as spoken of in Revelation?
What if I told you that it’s not those who are neither evil in the flesh nor without God in the flesh who are walking through the wide gate on the broad path merrily to their own destruction? As Psalm 1 states, “the ungodly shall not stand in the judgement, nor the sinners among the congregation of the righteous”. The reality is this, “afflicted is the gate and narrow the way, which leads to life, and few there be who find it”. Could it possibly be fewer than the doctrine of men might deceive you into believing? Take ye heed brothers and sisters, take ye heed.
.. for I am thy fellow servant and of the brethren that do possess the testimony of Jesus, worship and praise God, for this is the testimony of Jesus; the Spirit, the Prophesy.
Let those gifted with the ear, hear …
.
@@tehhermitsheep8711 It is refreshing to see a Christian actually admit that there is no logic to their religion and that their religion is completely reliant on personal beliefs (or what can be referred to as the individuals faith).
@@ObjectiveEthicsWhat does the Bible say? Within this verse is your answer.
Judas (not iscoriot) said Lord how is it that you will manifest yourself to us and not to the world?
@@bible1st Congratulations. Don't worry about the fact that the Bible is just political propaganda created to control the weak minded fool.
Excellent video, I loved the historical and chronological analysis. And the attempt to reconcile them with the biblical accounts in Matthew and Luke. Though much of it shrouded in mystery. I also liked your subtle sense of humor
awesome video nice one Merry Christmass
While you did your usual great job on covering the year, I’m disappointed in you half-hearted efforts on the day. There are many reasons that Dec. 25th is not supportable, and none of them involve sheep. Your research is usually much better than this. If you’re interested, I recommend you start with when and why Dec. 25th was actually made official by the Catholic Church. I hope you enjoy the history as much as I did.
Your video is clear and well presented. Your idea that it was the lambing season that He was born goes with what I've learnt. In that area of the world, spring is usually around March/April, in the month of Nisan. What festivals are held in the month of Nisan? Passover / Feast of Unleavened Bread / Feast of First Fruits. There is one other that falls on the 10th day of that month - Palm Sunday, or the day of the Lamb. You can find these feasts in Leviticus 23-26. The shepherds would be out in the fields waiting for the birthing of the lambs - the very first lamb. When they'd get one, they would raise it in the air and shout, "I have my lamb, I have my lamb". This lamb would be held for the following years sacrifices at the temple. God, on the other hand was saying, "Accept my Lamb, accept my Lamb as your sacrifice". So my theory is Jesus was born and died in the same month. But His return will be during the last three feasts in autumn - Trumpets, Day of Atonement (Judgment day) and Tabernacles - because the first four (including Festival of Harvest or Pentecost) have been fulfilled.
Jesus was born and died on
Passover Nissan 1th March 21,
Springtime Passover. It was the
lambing season. Jesus is the
sacrificed lamb, who takes away
the sins of the world. and Jesus will return the same day, when he was born and when he died.
Matthew 2:1-2 Luke 2:7-8
Luke 1: 5-9 Exodus 12:3-6
Exodus 40:1-2 Isaiah 60:1-6
@@Sola-Scriptura777 Thats your theory.
Winter is the busiest season in the pen - it’s kidding and lambing season.
From late November to late March there will be a number of births each day; between 100 and 200 kids and lambs will be born here
Amazing video. Since the gospels were written at least several decades after the events they cover, I would love to hear about what historical inaccuracies were commonly accepted at the time of their writing that would have led to the discrepancies. As in, historians have always been plagued by inaccurate year counting. Is it possible that the gospel writers were also under false assumptions about their recent history that could have led to the disagreement? Perhaps we'll never know, but it's interesting to think about. Also, EX-JW FTW, Matt!
The closest gospel was written 100 years after the supposed death of the purported Messiah, there are no actual records of a man named Jesus being crucifed. There were, however, a large number of men claiming to be the prophesised Saviour of the Jews at the time, so it is most likely that Jesus is a composit of the most popular and that is why there is such a wide margin between the two stories of his birth - different men trying to claim they fulfilled the requirement of the prophesy.
While there is evidence that the gospels were based on earlier writings (there is talk of a Gospel of Mary amongst others) it does not appear that any part of those writings survive (unless they are hidden in the Vatican Secret Library and no one has managed to formulate the right request to be able to get a look at them). Also the texts that were compiled into the first Bibles were chosen by a committee of Vatican clerics, and you probably know how well committees make decisions. (ie not well and very slowly and expensively)
@@SevCaswell ahhhhhh not true.
@@SevCaswell you really managed to make such a significant blunder I am even wondering what your sources are considering most liberal scholars would date atleast ONE gospel to prior to 100AD...which would be 70ish years. This is even allowing for just a gross liberal estimation, the evidence points to the 4 gospels all being written within the 1st century with John at the end of the century
Mind that Luke's gospel was adressed mainly to non-Jews Roman citizens (Luke is commonly considered to be the travel companion of Paul, so he wasn't in contact with a direct witness). So it's not surprising that it places Jesus to be born into the Empire and not in a peripheral kingdom, and refers to facts known to the Romans (Quirinus governor of Syria, the census...) and not to the cruelty of a client king.
@@SevCaswell Actually all the four gospels had been probably written between 30 to 70 years after the death of Christ, that's very close as long as ancient sources are concerned.
Luke proved to be a reliable historian. Notice that Luke 2:2 says that the census taken around the time Joseph and Mary went down to Bethlehem was the (FIRST) census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. This implies that there was a later census, most likely the one referred to by Josephus.
A small correction: Crassus was killed in 53 BCE, not 56 BCE (he attended the Lucca conference in that year). I think the date 56 BCE comes from the game Rome Total War, but feel free to correct me. Nice video nonetheless.
On the Massacre of the Innocents. As has been established by the absence of the year 0, the ancients started counting at 1. So by extension babies were 1 year old when born. This would explain why it is mentioned that Herod had all male infants 2 y/o and younger (i.e. between their birth and first year, as we would count it today) murdered. This would narrow the Matthew interval to between 5 and 4 BCE.
Great content. (Nitpicking here)You have Spring Solstice instead of Spring Equinox on the March Calendar.
Papa t you have raised an interesting point of perspective smashed it out the park mate
Devout Christian (Protestant) here. Love your video! Raw history with no assumptions or leanings. We'll never know the exact date and it only matters that it happened, not when.
He is wrong. The 4BC date for the death of Herod is very much in doubt and it could be 1BC. Notice he says 'consensus'. That often means bullshit. :)
Thank you for producing this informative video.
Thanks so much for a very interesting presentation! it's good to know more facts than I heard before. The important thing is our Christmas and that it is celebrated by most Christians. I love the season!
I celebrate x-mass with lights on my house, not the birth of Christ.
Io Saturnalia!
Dies Natalis Solis Invicti!
I know the answer i asked Jesus this past Christmas in prayer, and like always, he answered me ❤❤❤
What was the answer?
Very nice explanation, I love how you always manage to make number-crunching an enlightening experience. The only thing that may have been of note was how the year 1 AD was originally decided upon. (The fact that you did do this with the date of Christmas begs the question even further.)
in the 6th century Dionyses Exiguus had the task to calculate a new scedule for Easter Dates and proposed to count the years no longer as Anno Martyrium ( from Dioclatius days) but from the birth of Christ as Anno Dominum .... he just missed a few years in his calculation.
And he is forgiven, have you ever tried to make a calculation using Roman numbers only?
@Nehemiah Scudder could well be the case, the date of the destruction of the Temple was well documented in the Roman writting. I don't know the numerological meaning of the number 70 and Googling for it just gave me a fresh load of poppycock.
I was thinking there could be a connection with the year of Yubilee every 49th year, but is more likely that was something in the 6th century that was not on Dionyses mind at all. Far too Jewish.
@Nehemiah Scudder makes even more sense
and much more conveniant than calculating using Roman numbers
Awell, Dionysius would have converted the date of the destruction.... Year 2 of the reign of Vespasian to a Anno Martyrium date and the Era of the Martyrs started 284 CE
Ab Urbe Condatum was used by Livius but I don't know if it was used after him.