Hope of Israel Ministries (Ecclesia of YEHOVAH):
Did Herod the "Great" Really Die In 4 B.C.?
Placing Herod's death in 1 B.C. allows us to accept the ANCIENT tradition that the Messiah was born in 3 B.C. The evidence of history, archaeology and astronomy is now showing that Herod died in early 1 B.C. and that the Messiah was therefore born in 3/2 B.C. (regnal dating) -- as confirmed by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Africanus, Hippolytus of Rome, Hippolytus of Thebes, Origen, Eusebius and Epiphanius.
|
Juan Antonio Revilla and John D. Keyser
There is a very generalized tendency to select the Jupiter/Saturn conjunction around 7 B.C. as the time of the Messiah's birth. The alleged death of Herod in 4 B.C. has had a tremendous influence on this, being supported by:
1) The 3 Herod successors seem to have started their reigns in 4 B.C. -- implying that Herod died that year.
2) According to Flavius Josephus, Herod died between a Lunar eclipse and the following Passover, and generally this has been accepted to be the eclipse of March 13, 4 B.C.
3) Luke refers to an enrollment decree by Augustus, which is usually considered to be the tax call of 8 B.C.
4) It is assumed that Dionysius Exiguus made an enormous mistake (6-7 years) in his calculations for the birth of the Messiah.
The 4 statements above are not only arguable but highly improbable, and it is easy to show that other dates closer to tradition (3 B.C. -- 1 A.D.) explain the evidence better.
The discussion that follows is based mainly on John Mosley's "When was that Christmas Star" (The Griffith Observer, December, 1980), and John Pratt's "Yet Another Eclipse for Herod" (The Planetarian, December, 1990).
Herod's Successors
We will start quoting John Mosley regarding the time given to the beginning of Herod's successors' reigns:
"Herod suffered a grave political demotion in 4 BC, as the result of a misunderstanding over raiders he sent to Arabia to suppress robbers hiding there. Augustus condemned Herod, removed his title "Caesar's Friend" (amic Caesaris), and relegated him to the lower position of "subject." This loss of status was a serious matter. Its ramifications eventually included Herod's execution of his own son Antipater, and others, in a show of loyalty to Augustus. This happened immediately before Herod's death. The execution, however, created a problem in political bookkeeping. Upon his fall from favor with Augustus, Herod had named Antipater as coregent, and now the discredited Antipater's regnal years were no longer valid."
Writes Paul R. Finch --
"From the time of Judas Maccabee until King Herod the Jews were governed by the priestly family of the Hasmoneans. This dynasty seemingly ended when Herod came to power who was half Edomite and half Arab. To solidify his power in the eyes of the Jews He married one of the surviving descendents of the Hasmoneans, Mariame. Through this marriage he had two sons -- Alexander and Aristobulus. It was apparent that these two sons would someday carry on the Hasmonean rule. Yet, Herod had an older son by a Doris, a commoner, Antipater, who saw these two as a threat to his own rule. So Antipater concocted many false accusations against these two Hasmonean sons and finally Herod had them executed. When this happened everything hit the fan so to speak. It was at this time that Augustus revoked Herod's award as being 'Caesar's Friend' and demoted him to being of subject class. Although this was due to mainly intrigues with the Arabs and Augustus reconciled himself to Herod afterward, Herod was never restored to 'Caesar's Friend.'"At the death of Alexander and Aristobulus, Antipater became 'co-ruler with his father and in no way different from a king' (Josephus, Ant. XVII.2). This was in 4 B.C. Yet Antipater schemed to kill his father. When Herod heard about it he recalled Antipater from Rome to try him. He was convicted of high treason and Herod sent a request to Caesar to have him executed. Herod at this time changed his will and completely expunged Antipater's name from memory. It is assumed by many that shortly after this Herod died and was succeeded by Archelaus. But when Archelaus assumed power he was reckoned by Josephus as one who 'had long exercised royal authority' (War II.26). Obviously, Archelaus reckoned his rule from 4 B.C. while Herod was still alive. And Herod remained alive another three years."
This fact has made historians (Ernest Martin, The Birth of Christ Recalculated, 1978/1980) suggest "that Herod's reign was seen to have officially ended with his disgrace, not death, in 4 B.C., while his successor's appropriated Antipater's regnal years and incorporated them into their own reigns. Numerous similar situations can be found in history."
Based on a conjecture that the Star of Bethlehem is the Jupiter/Saturn conjunction, and that Herod the Great died in 4 B.C., plus another conjecture concerning the tax call of 8 B.C., ideas which are mere hypothesis are accepted as proven facts.
Which Lunar Eclipse?
Josephus mentions that Herod died in the interval between a Lunar eclipse and the following Passover. For centuries this has been thought to be the eclipse of March 13, 4 B.C., and this evidence of astronomy has had a large part in establishing the dogma that Herod died that year.
Recent calculations, however, showed that this eclipse was only partial (40 percent total and fairly hard to detect), and that the events narrated by Josephus to have occurred between this eclipse and the Passover that followed are impossible to fit in if one takes the 4 B.C. date. The total eclipses of January 9-10, 1 B.C. and December 29, 1 B.C., however, eliminate these problems.
To determine which lunar eclipse was the correct one, one needs to know that lunar eclipses happen ONLY when there is a full moon and ONLY with a frequency of three times a year. The eclipse of January 10, 1 B.C. is listed as eclipse number 1,860 in Theodor Oppolozer's Cannon of Eclipses (Dover, New York, 1962). That eclipse -- according to John Pratt -- was listed as TOTAL for 51 minutes near midnight and centered over 15 degrees east longitude -- which is PERFECT for having been viewed in Jerusalem. The eclipse of August 5 was over the Pacific Ocean and not visible in Jerusalem, while the one of December 29 was only partial.
Ernest Martin notes that
"the eclipse of Josephus had to have been that of January 9/10, 1 B.C. All the events mentioned by Josephus fit quite comfortably with this eclipse, and ONLY with this eclipse....In fact, everything fits beautifully in other ways. There is a Jewish document called the Megillath Taanith (Scroll of Fasting) which was composed, initially, not long after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This scroll mentions two semi-festival days during which no mourning was permitted. One is Kislev 7. The month of Kislev corresponds in most years with our December. The other commemorative day was Schebat 2. This month answers to our late January or early February. No one knows why these two days of feasting are commemorated yet they must have been days of joy ordained before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. What did they honor?"
An early Jewish commentator who probably lived in the seventh century wrote a brief remark to Kislev 7 (December 5th): 'The day of Herod's death.' However, M. Moise Schwab, who studied the information about the scroll very extensively, felt that it was really the second of the days, Schebat 2 (January 28th) that was the actual day commemorating Herod's death. And interestingly, this latter date fits remarkably well with the January 10th eclipse of Josephus. Herod's death on this very day would have occurred 18 days after the eclipse. All the information in Josephus about Herod's activities between the eclipse and his death fit compatibly with the chronological facts....Just before Herod died, he said: 'I know that the Jews will celebrate my death by A FESTIVAL.' And Schebat 2 (as well as Kislev 7 for the tearing down of the eagle and Tebeth 9 for the sentencing of the rabbis) fits the historical timetable perfectly. Also, the events that Josephus said happened between Herod's death and the next Passover can be chronologically placed in a reasonable way (The Star that Astonished the World, pp. 101-102, 104).
Impossible Time Constraint
The proponents of the theory that Herod died in 4 B.C. pretend that the following events all happened within 30 days:
1) Part of Herod's body was putrefied and bred worms. He is taken on a round-trip to warm baths 16 km away.
2) He orders all important men in all villages to come to Jerusalem (120-30 km). His son Antipas is executed and Herod dies 5 days later.
3) There is a magnificent funeral, and the body is carried 37 km. A 7-day mourning period starts, followed by a funeral feast.
4) Another mourning period is planned and executed for the patriots killed.Dr. Craig Chester elaborates on this --
"Herod was sick at the time of the execution of the rabbis, and his condition worsened almost immediately. He was treated for a time by his physicians, to no avail. He then decided to pack up the royal household and move to Jericho to take the baths. He tried the baths unsuccessfully for some days and then returned to Jerusalem. Believing that he soon would die, Herod came up with a diabolical plan to insure that all of Judea would mourn his death, in spite of his unpopularity. He commanded the leading men from around the country to come to Jerusalem where he imprisoned them in the Hippodrome and ordered the army to execute them as soon as he was dead. Judea would indeed mourn, he vowed. (Fortunately, the order was not carried out)."In the meantime, word arrived from Rome that Herod finally had the emperor's permission to execute his rebellious son Antipater and he promptly complied. Five days later Herod died, but not before decreeing that his to be the largest funeral ever held in the history of the world. His body was embalmed. The army was assembled to carry his body in the funeral procession to a burial site some 25 miles away. The soldiers walked in bare feet, as was required when in mourning, traveling ONE MILE A DAY. A legate from Rome, where word of Herod's death had been received, arrived to protect the royal treasury. Finally, Herod's son Archelaus was crowned king and had time to issue a few decrees prior to the celebration of Passover" (The Star of Bethlehem, 1996).
Only then came the Passover. The 29 days between the eclipse of 4 B.C. and the following Passover simply did not allow enough time for all of the above events to occur. A minimum of TEN WEEKS would have been required as Ernest Martin and others showed very carefully. Therefore the 4 B.C. date fails to account for what Josephus recorded. But on January 10, 1 B.C., there was a total lunar eclipse visible in Jerusalem which happened near midnight and lasted 51 minutes -- more than enough time to be observed by most people in the city.
The "Pater Patriae"
In the temple of Augustus at Ankara, an inscription was found referring to a census in the year 8 B.C. The relationship of this "tax call" with the enrollment of Joseph and Mary is an UNFOUNDED conjecture, since it would apply only to Roman citizens. And it is even more conjectural to imagine that Mary would have had to travel so far, because the taxes would apply only to Joseph.
On the other hand, historians have identified a combination of a census and an oath of allegiance that would have effectively involved Mary and Joseph -- done between the years 3 and 2 B.C. -- as the result of an imperial decree related to the bestowal of the title "Pater Patriae" on Augustus by the Senate on February the 5th of the year 2 B.C. Josephus recorded that nearly 6000 Pharisees refused to take the oath, approximately one year before Herod died, and Orosio, a historian of the 5th Century, CLEARLY links this oath with the enrollment of Joseph and Mary:
"[Augustus] ordered that a census be taken of each province everywhere and that all men be enrolled. So at that time, Christ was born and was entered on the Roman census list as soon as he was born. This is the earliest and most famous public acknowledgment which marked Caesar as the first of all men and the Romans as lords of the world...that first and greatest census was taken, since in this one name of Caesar all the peoples of the great nations took oath, and at the same time through the participation in the census, were made part of one society (quoted by John Pratt)."
Later, Orosio identifies the time of the census using two Roman systems that agreed among themselves, implying a lower limit for the death of Herod on the basis of this evidence of 2 B.C.
This census would have included Joseph and Mary even though they were not Roman citizens. Being of royal lineage ("of the Houses of David"), both Joseph and Mary would have had to go specifically to Bethlehem to enroll. Augustus' decree required that all adults pledge their good will to Caesar, and the complete enrollment was presented to him as part of the celebrations.
Nevertheless, the proponents of the theory that Herod died in 4 B.C. keep repeating over and over again that "Dionysius was wrong" -- even though nobody has ever explained why convincingly! It is an assumption based on a false premise, because Herod did not die in 4 B.C. but in the year 1 B.C. The assertion regarding the year 4 B.C. is refutable on many grounds, and Ernest Martin in 1978 carefully showed its virtual impossibility, of which I have mentioned only the main arguments in this summary.
Dionysius Exiguus and Luke in Error?
I have already mentioned that many accuse Dionysius Exiguus of being wrong by 4 years in his time of the birth of the Messiah.This, however, is a myth and finds no support whatsoever among competent historians. The astronomer and chronologist John Pratt has come to the same conclusion: No satisfactory answer, it appears, has been proposed to this long standing puzzle.
This is what John Mosley wrote back in 1980 (capitals are mine):"Incidentally, it is often claimed that Dionysius Exiguus made a four-year error in calculating the date of birth of Christ by forgetting to allow for the four years that Augustus ruled under his original name Octavian. Although this claim has been sanctioned by time, IT APPEARS TO BE A MYTH AND FINDS NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER AMONG HISTORIANS. Dionysius was a prominent scholar who lived in Rome in the 6th Century and who had access to accurate records, including many now lost to us. The reigns of the emperors were well-known, and he was certainly aware of Augustus' change of name. Dionysius carefully selected the date of December 25, 1 BC, for the birth of Christ, and counted the commencement of the Christian era with January 1, 1 AD, six days later, to agree with the start of the Roman year, and was probably much closer to the truth than we have given him credit for."
According to the theory -- erroneously accepted as fact -- not only Dionysius was "wrong" but also Luke, regardless of his care in recording information that would help to establish a historical perspective, since at the time of baptism, according to them, the Messiah was about 36 years old, not 30 as Luke said, and was about 40 when he died. In my opinion, not only is it true that THIS IDEA CANNOT PASS THE TEST OF THE EVIDENCE AVAILABLE, but maintaining it shows the same "manipulation of truth" of which tradition is accused, except that it goes in the opposite direction, echoing the cynical times in which we live.
The Astronomical Evidence
What astronomical events, possibly in the years 3 or 2 B.C., might have been related to the Star of Bethlehem? A nova -- the unexpected, sudden brightening of a star from invisibility into a bright object for a period of days or weeks -- has been suggested. But there is no historical record of such a nova, nor is it clear what a nova's astrological significance would be. Origen himself suggested a comet, for comets appear sporadically, move, and can even seem to point down to the earth. But the recorded comets around this time, even Halley's Comet in 12 B.C., were not very impressive; astrologically, they were considered ominous. Meteors and fireballs are even less likely candidates.
Conjunctions of planets have also long been considered good possibilities. A conjunction is a close apparent approach between two celestial objects. Technically speaking, a conjunction occurs at the moment when both objects have the same celestial longitude; one is due north of the other. The closer the objects, the more visually impressive the event and the more significant astrologically. In 3 B.C. and 2 B.C., there was a series of close conjunctions involving Jupiter, the planet that represented kingship, coronations, and the birth of kings. In the Judean world Jupiter was known as Sedeq or "Righteousness," a term also used for the Messiah.
On September 14, 3 B.C., and on February 17 and May 8 in 2 B.C., Jupiter the King planet stood next to Regulus the brightest star in Leo, which also represented Royalty. Then came a climax to the display. On June 17, 2 B.C., Venus and Jupiter -- the two brightest planets in the Solar System -- appeared to collide. They stood an incredible 1/50th degree apart and seemed to fuse into one immense ball of light. This was an unprecedented event. This exceptionally rare spectacle could not have been missed by the Magi. But that was not all. On August 27 in 2 B.C. there was a grand meeting of the planets in Virgo. Jupiter and Mars were only 1/7th degree apart and close at hand were Mercury and Venus standing together in the glare of the rising sun.
In fact, we have seen here only the highlights of an impressive series of planetary motions and conjunctions fraught with a variety of astrological meanings, involving all the other known planets of the period: Mercury, Mars, and Saturn. The astrological significance of these impressive events must surely have been seen by the Magi as the announcement of the impending birth of a great king of the Judeans.
But if the planet Jupiter was the Star of Bethlehem, or was a component of the events that triggered the visit by the Magi, how do we view the final appearance of the Star on their journey to Bethlehem? It would have been in the southern sky, though fairly high above the horizon. Could the Star have stopped over Bethlehem? The answer is yes. The word "stop" was used for what we now call a planet's "stationary point." A planet normally moves eastward through the stars from night to night and month to month, but regularly exhibits a "retrograde loop." After it passes the opposite point in the sky from the sun, it appears to slow, come to a full stop, and move backward (westward) through the sky for some weeks. Again it slows, stops, and resumes its eastward course.
This is caused by the orbits of Jupiter and the earth as the earth and Jupiter "take up the slack," as it were, in their orbital differences. This gives the earth sky viewer the illusion that Jupiter is reversing its movement.
The conjunctions of Venus and Jupiter in 3 and 2 B.C. around the fixed star Regulus were impressive and unique celestial phenomena. Since the ephemeris of Brian Tuckerman were published in the mid-60's, allowing the experts to know this fact, Jupiter/Venus have been the preferred alternative for the star of Bethlehem in the mind of many astronomers and historians.
And since the publication of Ernest Martin in 1978 (The Birth of Christ), scholars have acknowledged the difficulties with the 4 B.C. date for the death of Herod, which Martin clearly proved was impossible. The account of Josephus, the succession of rulers, the Lunar eclipse, used to establish that date, have been carefully scrutinized to demonstrate the hypothesis that Herod died in 1 B.C. The 4 B.C. hypothesis is the least probable.
And about the enrollment alluded by Luke, Martin showed that it is not the tax call of 8 B.C. but a census and oath of allegiance ordered to celebrate Augustus Caesar's Silver Jubilee, who was going to receive the title of "Pater Patriae".
All these points have been widely discussed and explained in recent literature. I feel that ignoring them and preferring other hypothesis that contradict tradition is a matter of psychology, related to the unconscious - or very conscious -- need to assume that the Church manipulated everything or that the ancients were wrong and we are right.
The Question of Quintilius Varus
Sometimes, for example, the argument is made that Josephus records Quintilius Varus as governor of Syria when Herod died, and Varus is shown as such in coins from 4 B.C. The problem with this evidence, as Pratt explains from Martin, is that coins also show Varus governing Syria in 6 and 5 B.C., while Josephus recorded Saturninus as governor during the two following years. Martin mentions an inscription found near the Varus village describing a man who was governor of Syria twice, probably referring to Varus, since his second term would correspond to 1 B.C. and there is no record of any other person as ruler that year.
According to Paul Finch --
"Josephus tells us that Quintilius Varus had taken over the governorship when Antipater the heir to King Herod had returned from Rome to Jerusalem and that he succeeded 'Saturninus as governor of Syria' (Ant. XVII.89). But coins have been found which show that Varus was legate of Syria in the 25th, 26th, and 27th years of the Actian Era (6 to 4 B.C.). This is where historians trip up and conclude that they have proof that Herod must have died in 4 B.C. because Varus is shown to have been active in 4 B.C. But the answer is dangling right before their eyes and they can not see it. An inscription known as the Lapis Tiburtinus speaks of a governor of Syria during the time of Augustus who had been governor twice. Many have tried to identify this inscription with Quirinius in order to show that he held office before his 6 A.D. tenure. But professor Syme has shown that Quirinius is impossible ('The Titulus Tiburtinus' in Vestia Akten, Munich:1972). L.R. Taylor suggests that Titius is the subject of this inscription, but Syme has shown that Titius would have been much too old to receive the 'ornamento trimphalia' given only after 12 B.C. Yet the inscription was found only a stones throw from Varus' villa in Tibur. The reason some scholars object to Varus is that the inscription refers to Augustus as divine which was bestowed on him at his death in A.D. 14. whereas Varus died in A.D. 9. But because Varus was defeated in Germany, he was never commemorated while Augustus lived. Yet, when Tiberius came to power who was Varus' brother-in-law, Tiberius went to the battlefield to bring back the fallen Varus' remains and his memory was restored as a defender of the Empire. Therefore, this objection is weak in the extreme."
What About Publius Sulpicius Quirinius?
Writes Paul Finch,"This brings us to [Publius Sulpicius] Quirinius who conducted the 'enrollment.' Luke says that he was governor. Yet, Quirinius was not officially a governor until A.D. 6. But it does seem probable that Quirinius may have been a provisional governor in 3/2 B.C. while the actual legate was away at Rome. Indeed, Justin Martyr called Quirinius the "procurator of Syria" (Apology I.34). The Cambridge Ancient History tells us that 'Each province had its equestrian procurator who in the eyes of the provincials was almost as important as the governor himself' (vol. X, 216). Quirinius in the records seems to have been a 'man-Friday' by all accounts. Tacitus said that his command in the war of the Homonadenses was a 'special command.' An inscription mentions him 'as holding an honorary municipal office at Antioch-by-Pisidia' (Sherwin-White, 165). He also became guardian of Gaius Caesar, the heir to the Empire when Gaius acquired residential authority at Antioch over the eastern provinces in A.D. 1 (Tacitus, Annals III.48). Tacitus also said that Quirinius was one who had 'considerable talents for business' (ibid.). In A.D. 2 he married Aemelia Lepida, a descendant of Sulla and Pompey. This no doubt gave him much more political standing and in A.D. 6 he became legate of Syria upon the death of Archelaus, at which time Judaea was annexed. This change in government gave reason for Quirinius's second census of Judaea mentioned in Acts 5:37. This is why Luke distinguished the registration at the time of Jesus' birth as being the 'first' one, while he was [provisional] governor of Syria which Justin Martyr said was actually while he was procurator."
Finch goes on to say --
"But who was the actual governor at this time? The early Christian apologist Tertullian living in the late second century, who was by profession a lawyer and well acquainted with Roman governmental affairs, said that the census that brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem was conducted when Sentius Saturninus was governor of Syria (Answer to the Jews, ch. 8). What's more, he said it occurred in the 41st year of Augustus answering to 3/2 B.C. Indeed, the early Christian sources were nearly united in stating that Jesus was born in 3/2 B.C. The list includes Clement of Alexandria, Origin, Africanus, Hippolytus of Rome, Hippolytus of Thebes, and Cassiodorus Senator (Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology, p. 229). This is strong testimony indeed because these sources were able to consult the vast libraries at their disposals which modern historians no longer have access. But the next best thing to having access to these vital records is to accept the testimony of those who did! Modern scholarship has disgraced itself in an utter unprofessional way by ignoring this testimony in favor of our present fragmentary knowledge for this period."
With this missing piece of evidence we can now reconstruct the succession of Syrian Governors as follows:
| 1) M. Titius | 13-7 B.C. |
| 2) P. Quintilius Varus | 7-4 B.C. |
| 3) Sentius Saturninus | 4-2 B.C. |
| 4) P. Quintilius Varus (a second time) | 2 B.C.-A.D. 1 |
| 5) C. Caesar | A.D. 1-4 |
Based upon the writings of Flavius Josephus -- which have proven to be highly accurate -- and the calculations of relevant lunar events, it is clear that Herod the "Great" died in 1 B.C. -- NOT 4 B.C. Placing Herod's death in 1 B.C. allows us to accept the ANCIENT tradition that the Messiah was born in 2 B.C. The four earliest Christian writers who report the date of the Messiah's birth are Irenaeus (late second century), Clement of Alexandria (about A.D. 200), Tertullian (early third century), and Africanus (early third century). Africanus specifies the date in terms that can be understood as 3/2 B.C. Both Irenaeus and Tertullian assign Yeshua's birth to the 41st year of Augustus. If this date presumes that the reign of Augustus began when he was elevated to consulship in August 43 B.C., the year intended is 2 B.C. (Tishri 1, 3 B.C. to Tishri 1, 2 B.C. -- Jewish regnal dating). Tertullian conveniently confirms this conclusion by adding that the Messiah's birth was 28 years after the death of Cleopatra and 15 years before the death of Augustus. Cleopatra died in August 30 B.C., and Augustus died in August A.D. 14.
The evidence of history, archaeology and astronomy is now showing that Herod died in early 1 B.C. and that the Messiah was therefore born in 3/2 B.C. (regnal dating) -- as confirmed by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Africanus, Hippolytus of Rome, Hippolytus of Thebes, Origen, Eusebius and Epiphanius.
Beginning with August, 3 B.C., and ending December, 2 B.C., a number of planetary and stellar phenomena occurred which could not but have excited observers.
Beginning with August 1, 3 B.C., the planet Jupiter became visible above the eastern horizon as a morning star. 12 days later, a little before 4 a.m., Jupiter would have been in close conjunction with Venus (already a morning star for 6 months), and the space between them was just about 0.08 degrees, though the planets did not appear to touch one another (a rare phenomenon indeed). Some five days later, Mercury emerged from the Sun also to become a morning star. While this was happening, Venus left its previous conjunction with Jupiter and headed toward Mercury.
On the morning of September 1, Venus and Mercury came into conjunction (.35 degrees from each other; it must be kept in mind that these planetary motions and relationships are the apparent ones viewed by observers on earth).
After the Sept. 1 meeting with Mercury, Venus journeyed back into the light of the Sun, emerging in the West as an evening star about December 20, 3 B.C., and when this happened, an observer would have witnessed the planet just after sunset moving progressively higher in the sky (going more easterly) with each succeeding day. This movement placed Venus on a collision course with Jupiter which was moving westward. At the period when Venus had just passed its easternmost elongation from the Sun (the farthest east of the Sun that Venus ever reaches) on June 17, 2 B.C., the two planets "collided". They were in 0.04 degrees away from each other.
This was a most uncommon occurrence. To an observer on Earth, the luminosity that each planet displayed made them look like one gigantic star. It was as if Venus had stretched herself as far eastward as she was able, in order to join with Jupiter as he reached westward to meet her. This conjunction occurred at the exact time of the full Moon. The whole of the evening sky was being illumined from the east by the full light of the Moon, while the western quarter was being adorned with the Jupiter/Venus conjunction.
Professor D.C. Morton, Senior Research Astronomer at Princeton University, said this conjunction of June 17, 2 B.C., was a notable astronomical event (ZPEB, vol. I, pg. 398). Such closeness had not been witnessed in generations. Roger W. Sinnott, writing in the astronomical journal Sky and Telescope, December, 1968, pps. 384-386, referred to this conjunction as a brilliant "double star" which finally gave the appearance of fusing together into a single "star" as the planets drew nearer the western horizon. He said that only the sharpest of eyes would have been able to split them and that the twinkling caused by the unsteady horizon atmosphere would have blended them into one gigantic "star" for almost all viewers. "The fusion of two planets would have been a rare and awe-inspiring event" (pg. 386). Here were the two brightest planets in the heavens merging together. This was happening at the period when Venus was approaching her time of greatest brilliance.
This splendid conjunction was only half the picture. While Jupiter was on its westward journey to link up with Venus for the spectacular June 17, 2 B.C., reunion, Jupiter was showing some displays of its own. Just 33 days after the first Jupiter/Venus conjunction (August 12, 3 B.C.), an observer would have seen Jupiter come into juxtaposition with Regulus (the principal star in the constellation of Leo, a star of the 1st magnitude). The conjunction occurred on September 14, 3 B.C., and viewed from the Earth the two celestial bodies were 0.67 degrees apart.
After that, Jupiter proceeded on his normal course through the heavens, and on December 1, 3 B.C., the planet stopped its motion through the fixed stars to begin its annual retrogression. In doing so, it headed once again towards the star Regulus. Then on February 17, 2 B.C., the two were reunited (1.19 degrees apart). Jupiter was again side by side with the star, the two bodies being 1.06 degrees from each other (for Jupiter to unite with Regulus 3 times in 1 year is not common. It occurred 12 years earlier in 15/14 B.C., and before that in 86/85 B.C. It was not to recur until 69/70 A.D.). After this 3rd conjunction with Regulus, Jupiter continued moving westward for 40 days (in an apparent sense) to reunite with Venus in the rare conjunction of June 17, 2 B.C.
This is not all. On August 27, 2 B.C., the planet Mars, which had played no active part in the conjunctions, "caught up" with Jupiter and formed a very close union (Mars travels faster in its motion through the stars than Jupiter and overtakes it in a little over 2 years). At this conjunction the two were only 0.09 degrees from each other. Such nearness is not an ordinary occurrence. Besides this, there was also a convergence of Venus and Mercury into the same part of the sky as Jupiter and Mars.
This means that four major planets were all positioned around one another in an exceptional longitudinal relationship. An assemblage of planets in such close proximity to one another is called in astrological circles a massing of the planets. And look at the close association they had to each other. The longitude of Jupiter was 142.6 degrees, Mars 142.64, Venus 141.67, and Mercury 143.71. This would have been an interesting sight to behold, but the visible effect would have been diminished because of the rays of the dawn, since the four planets were only 8 degrees ahead of the Sun.
The year 3/2 B.C. was certainly an extraordinary one for visible astronomical exhibitions, as there was no year similar to it for many years on either side (a foretaste had occurred back in 7 B.C., as Jupiter and Saturn had come into conjunction on 3 occasions: May 26, October 3, and December 1, and this was followed in early 6 B.C. with a close triangulation with Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. This occurred when the planets were in Pisces. These conjunctions are the ones some present-day historians feel were connected with the signs indicated by Matthew in his account of the birth of the Messiah. The majority will not look this side of 4 B.C. due to the fixation with the 4 B.C. date for the death of Herod).
The year 3/2 B.C. stood far above any near contenders for a period of exceptional signs in the heavens to herald the Messiah's birth (Genesis1:14).
Jupiter’s interesting behavior may explain the kingly aspect of the Star. But there are nine qualifications of the Star of Bethlehem. Many are still missing. How did Jupiter’s movement relate to the Jewish nation? Is its association with the Jewish New Year enough? Where is an indication of a birth? Some might say that the triple conjunction by itself would indicate to a magus that a new king was on the scene. Maybe. But there is more.
The Jewish nation is composed of twelve ancient tribes. Jewish prophecy states that a particular tribe will bring forth the Messiah: the tribe of Judah. The symbol of Judah’s tribe is the lion. You can see these connections in an ancient prediction of Messiah’s coming found in the first book of the Bible, the Book of Genesis, Chapter 49:
9 You are a lion’s cub, O Judah; you return from the prey, my son. Like a lion he crouches and lies down, like a lioness– who dares to rouse him?10 The sceptre will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his.— GENESIS 49:9-10
This association of Messiah with the tribe of Judah and with the lion is a productive clue. It clarifies the connection between Jupiter’s behavior and the Jewish nation, because the starry coronation—the triple conjunction—occurred within the constellation of Leo, The Lion. Ancient stargazers, particularly if they were interested in things Jewish, may well have concluded they were seeing signs of a Jewish king. But there is more.
The last book of the New Testament is, in part, a prophetic enigma. But a portion of the Book of Revelation provides clear and compelling guidance for our astronomical investigation. The apostle John wrote the book as an old man while in exile on the island of Patmos. Perhaps the austerity of this exile or a lack of companionship left him time to ponder the night sky. Whatever the reason, Revelation is full of star imagery. InRevelation, Chapter 12, John describes a life and death drama played out in the sky: the birth of a king.
1 A great and wondrous sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on his heads. 4 His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that he might devour her child the moment it was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron sceptre…— REVELATION 12:1-5
A woman in labor, a dragon bent on infanticide and a ruler of the nations. We have already seen this ruler in the Book of Genesis, above. This would be the Messiah, in his role as King of Kings. If that interpretation is correct, then according to the gospel story the woman would be Mary, the mother of Jesus. The dragon which waits to kill the child at birth would be Herod, who did that very thing. John says the woman he saw was clothed in the Sun. She had the moon at her feet. What can he be describing? When we continue our study of the sky of September of 3 BC, the mystery of John’s vision is unlocked: he is describing more of the starry dance which began with the Jewish New Year.
As Jupiter was beginning the coronation of Regulus, another startling symbol rose in the sky. The constellation which rises in the east behind Leo is Virgo, The Virgin. When Jupiter and Regulus were first meeting, she rose clothed in the Sun. And as John said, the moon was at her feet. It was a new moon, symbolically birthed at the feet of The Virgin.
The sheer concentration of symbolism in the stars at this moment is remarkable. These things could certainly lead our magus to conclude that a Jewish king had been born. But even this is not the whole story. These symbols could indicate a birth, but if they were interpreted to indicate the time of conception, the beginning of a human life, might there be something interesting in the sky nine months later? Indeed. In June of 2 BC, Jupiter continued the pageantry.
Yahshua’s First Advent Ties to Chanukah and Christmas
Pillar of Enoch Ministry (POEM)
http://pillar-of-enoch.com
Updated on 10-23-2012, 11-11-2015, and 11-22-2015
In this illustrated and detailed article, my desire as a Messianic Believer is to show that both Christmas, and the traditions associated with it such as Christmas trees and wreaths are not evil or forbidden under the New Covenant. In addition, I will show why the holiday season that starts on Thanksgiving Day in Canada and the United States, and goes through to after Christmas Day is the Christian Expression of the season of Jewish Feasts that stretches from the week of Sukkot or Tabernacles to the week of Chanukah or the Festival of Lights.
In a similar vein, I have previously shown that Pascha or Easter is the Christian expression of the day of the First-fruits Offering that was done on Sunday, the day after the regular Sabbath, during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Click the following embedded link to read my Blog article about this:“Easter Not Pagan, But A Celebration of Firstfruits!””
Armed with much research and the Ruach Ha Kodesh (i.e. Holy Spirit), our Father Yahweh God has made something perfectly clear to me: Saturnalia HAS NOTHING TO DO with Christmas, and Christmas Trees are NOT evil! I proved this in an article entitled “DON'T LET ANYONE DETER YOU FROM CELEBRATING YAHSHUA'S INCARNATION!””, which reports my findings when doing a study concerning the dates of the Pagan feasts that fell around Christmas. In that study, I discovered that none of the Pagan feasts in ancient times coincided with December 25th until the 5th Century, and the Roman cult followers of Sol Invictus likely tried to tie their Pagan feast to the Christian one that had already been celebrated at that time for centuries in order to win Christian converts to their false religion surrounding the worship of the Sun.
Let me show you some other facts surrounding this assertion. First of all, Christmas is likely a Solar Calendar date that was made for Grafted-In Gentile Believers in ancient times to celebrate the Feast of Chanukah. The reasoning behind this date is as follows: the Solar Twelfth month of December is the first month of Winter on the Solar Calendar, just as the Jewish Ninth Month of Kislev is the first month of Winter on their Lunar Calendar. Furthermore, though the 1st Century Apostles did not celebrate Christmas as it is conceptualized by Christians today, the Apostles did celebrate Chanukah, which begins on Kislev 25. This date on the Jewish Lunar Calendar is analogous to the Gentile Solar Calendar date of December 25th.
Now, it is important to remember that Christ's Apostles were Jews who must have understand Chanukah's connection to Christ's entire Nativity story via their baptism with the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, the Apostle Paul and others in the Church realized that Gentile believers were not expected to follow a Lunar calendar in their society, and Solar calendar equivalents needed to be found from them to keep the three major Feasts of Yahweh, which are Passover or Easter, Pentecost or Shavuot, and Sukkot or the Feast of Tabernacles. However, due to Yahshua's Nativity having a direct connection to Chanukah as the time of His conception and true entry into human life, and the fact that Chanukah is considered to be a secondary celebration of Sukkot among many Jews. Christmas or Chanukah counts as the Christian celebration of that Feast.
Part of the reason Chanukah or Christmas should be very important to believers is because Yahshua was likely conceived at Chanukah, and was most likely discovered by the Magi at Chanukah. That is why the early Christians likely chose to celebrate His coming then. After all, His conception in Miriam’s womb was His first moment as a mortal man, not His birth! If you check the encyclopedias for the history of Saturnalia and other Pagan feasts, you will find that NONE of these feasts held anywhere in the Roman Empire fell on December 25th until four hundred years after Yahshua was conceived and born. Furthermore, the Winter Solstice occurred around December 23rd in the centuries before and after Yahshua’s proposed conception during Chanukah in December of 4 BC, and the Pagan feasts associated with the Winter Solstice were not connected to December 25th either since the Winter Solstice fell on December 22nd or 23rd in ancient times.
The truth is that ALL the encyclopedias, historical books and sites with ANY information about the celebration of Christmas completely ignore the fact that no Pagan feasts were celebrated on that date until the 5th Century AD, but the Roman Calendar date of December 25th can be directly connected to Kislev 25, the first day of the Jewish Feast of Chanukah. Furthermore, the majority of the historical sources of information that the West relies on have been written by scholars with a vested interest in keeping Christianity and Judaism completely separate and antagonistic, and by those who are determined to promote Paganism or Atheism over Judeo-Christianity.
This leaves only ONE conclusion as to why the Apostles or Early Church Fathers may have chosen that date for the celebration of Yahshua’s entrance into the world, and that is the fact that Kislev 25 and December 25th have an obvious connection to Chanukah, and it is conception and NOT birth that is the official beginning of human life. It’s therefore time someone started decrying all the misinformed and brainwashed Christmas-bashers in the Church and the Messianic movement with the REAL facts surrounding Christmas, not the manufactured ones meant to destroy Christian holy traditions. What should be clear to every believer, but unfortunately is not, is that the constant attacks on Christmas these days are also attacks on Christians and Christianity. It is therefore not being done for the sake of righteousness, but to advance Satan’s kingdom of wickedness!
December 25th was likely picked as the day to celebrate Yahshua’s entrance into the world via conception (as the calculated date of the fetus’ conception in the womb is everyone’s TRUE birthday!) by the Apostles for the Gentile believers living under Roman rule for several important and valid religious reasons. First of all, as already mentioned, December 25th jives well with the Kislev 25 date for the beginning of Chanukah. Secondly, the 9th Jewish Lunar month of Kislev almost always falls in December. Thirdly, if Yahshua was born in September of 3 BC, as I have virtually proven in my books and articles, then the shepherds likely found the infant Yahshua in a Sukkot booth, NOT in a smelly barn or animal pen. Nonetheless, Yahshua’s real FIRST ADVENT would NOT have been during the Feast of Tabernacles or Sukkot, but sometime during the week of Chanukah, when He was conceived by the Ruach Ha Kodesh, or Holy Spirit.
This can be logically proven. For example, there are about 270 to 280 days or 9 months (+ or - 3 to 10 days) in the average cycle of human gestation. Furthermore, the Sign in the Heavens announcing Yahshua’s imminent birth described in Revelation 12:1-2 of the Woman Clothed with the Sun is an allegorical reference to the Sun being in the center of the sign of Virgo, which partly represents Yahshua’s mother Miriam, as well as the True Church. Fascinatingly, about 270 days after Chanukah in 4 BC, the sign of the Woman Clothed with the Sun (Virgo with the Sun positioned in her belly region) appeared on the horizon on September 11th, 3 BC, which was the Feast of Trumpets that year. At the same time, the Messiah planet Jupiter was in conjunction with the king star Regulus in the sign of Leo, the Lion of Judah, and the thin sliver of the New Moon was at her feet. Since this was a clear sign of Yahshua’s imminent birth as described in Revelation 12, He was likely born shortly thereafter.
Some scholars believe that Yahshua was actually born during the Feast of Sukkot or Tabernacles, beginning on the night of September 25th in 3 BC. However, I believe that Yahshua may have been born nearer to Yom Kippur that year, though it could have been on Yom Teruah as well. However, I believe that Yahshua was conceived around December 19th in 4 BC, which was the fifth day of Chanukah that year - the day that is tied to the Servant Lamp associated with the Messiah in a Chanukiah style, nine-branched menorah. Therefore, since conception is the TRUE beginning of life, NOT birth, Yahshua our “Immanuel” or “God With Us” truly came to be with us during the Feast of Chanukah or the “Festival of Lights”, not during the Feast of Sukkot/Tabernacles 15 days later. Interestingly though, there is a Jewish tradition that Chanukah is like a second Feast of Tabernacles. So, in that sense, Yahshua's coming is connected to Tabernacles twice!
When carefully read, the Scriptures coupled with Sacred Astronomy also make it clear that there is a double tie-in with Yahshua’s birth narratives and Chanukah. This is because the Apostle Matthew clearly said that the Wise Men or Magi found Yahshua in Bethlehem living in a house with his earthly mother and father when he was a young child or toddler in Matthew Chapter 2. There, in verse 9, the Greek word “paidion” meaning “toddler” was translated as “young child”. This strongly suggests that the Magi arrived in Bethlehem to see Yahshua at least a year after he was born. For proof of this, I've reproduced the salient portion of Matthew Chapter 2 below. This excerpt contains the lovely story of Yahshua's presentation to the Wise Men or Magi - who followed the wandering star that we know as the planet Jupiter, the Messiah Planet - to Jerusalem, and then onward to Bethlehem:
~*~ Matthew 2:1-12 ~*~ “Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem saying,
“Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.”
3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. 4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. 5 So they said to him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written by the prophet:
6 ‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
Are not the least among the rulers of Judah;
For out of you shall come a Ruler
Who will shepherd My people Israel.’ (Micah 5:2)
7 Then Herod, when he had secretly called the wise men, determined from them what time the star appeared. 8 And he sent them to Bethlehem and said, “Go and search carefully for the young Child, and when you have found Him, bring back word to me, that I may come and worship Him also.”
9 When they heard the king, they departed; and behold, the star which they had seen in the East went before them, till it came and stood over where the young Child was. 10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy. 11 And when they had come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother, and fell down and worshiped Him. And when they had opened their treasures, they presented gifts to Him: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. 12 Then, being divinely warned in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed for their own country another way.
The Wise Men who found Yahshua or Jesus in Bethlehem by following His Star in the heavens were wealthy and well-educated members of the elite where they resided in Parthia, and they would have traveled with a large entourage of guards and servants, especially since they carried such valuable items as gold, frankincense and myrrh, which were costly gifts ordinarily given to royalty. As educated men, the Magi knew much more about the movements of the stars and their spiritual meanings than anyone else of their age, and they were viewed with great respect because of what they knew. So when they followed this star to Jerusalem and onward, the Wise Men were not just following any star. It had to have had a direct spiritual meaning tied to the people of Israel and their King.
 |
| Jupiter: a Fitting Symbol for our Messiah |
 |
| Illustration: Star of Bethlehem Sign # 1 in Leo on June 17th, 2 BC |
As for the Signs in the Heavens that may have alerted the Wise Men to leave Parthia, the Planet Jupiter was considered to be a wandering star in ancient times, and it was prominent in the sky above Jerusalem and Bethlehem at night in the highly significant constellations of Leo and Virgo between June and December of 2 BC, which was nearly a year, to over a year after Yahshua's proposed birth in September of 3 BC. The first of these signs that the Magi may have found of particular importance was the conjunction of the Messiah Planet Jupiter with the Morning Star Venus on June 14th, 2 BC, as shown in the illustration above this paragraph.
Jupiter next appeared in a spectacular conjunction with Mars, Mercury and the Morning Star Venus between the Zodiac signs of Leo and Virgo on August 27th, 2 BC. Fascinatingly, Virgo was considered to be the first sign of the Zodiac in ancient times, not Aries, thereby making Leo the last sign of the Zodiac. This means that any conjunction between these two signs is suggestive of Yahshua as the First (Virgo) and the Last (Leo), the Alpha (Aleph) and the Omega (Tav), and the Beginning and the End, just as Yahshua is called three times in the Book of Revelation (See Rev. 1:11;Rev. 2:8, and Rev. 22:13). Therefore, as shown in the illustration below, this August 27th, 2 BC conjunction may have been the final heavenly sign among many preceding signs that triggered the Magi, who were Sacred Astronomers, to leave Persia (which was called Parthia at the time), and travel to Judea.
 |
| Illustration: Star of Bethlehem Sign # 2 in Leo Major Conjunction of Sun, Moon, Planets on August 27th, 2 BC |
Interestingly, the nine days of Chanukah always begin on the 25th of Kislev, while the twelve days of Christmas always begin on December 25th, and Kislev usually always falls in December. So it would have been natural for Paul and the other Apostles and disciples attempting to lead the many Gentile saints within the Greco-Roman culture to associate Yahshua’s birth narrative stories with December 25th, the Greco-Roman date most closely meshing with the 25th of Kislev beginning of Chanukah. After all, these converts to Christianity were not becoming Torah-observant Jews when they accepted Yahshua. They were entering into a New Covenant of Grace similar to, but better than the Covenant that God unconditionally made with Abraham, who was a Gentile who loved Yahweh God, and followed Him before any Jews even existed.
No comments:
Post a Comment