Merry non-Christbirth time!!

[RevTestament]

Alrighty, ba humbug, and all that good stuff. I thought I would take some grinchy time, to wish all those who frequent the forum this Christmas season a happy time as I probably won't be posting much. So I thought I might start a friendly debate/war on the issue of Christ's birth. Last year I came to some conclusions about this, but I was wondering if anyone has any serious input. I think virtually all will agree that Christ was not actually born at the end of December. I think scripture gives us some strong hints at the time of year Yeshua was born, and correcting history for error, I have come to a conclusion on a year he was born as well - 3 BC. (I take the BoM's 600 years as just a well-rounded statement on the amount of time til Christ's birth rather than an exactly counted figure - much like we would use in conversation, but this date may still have some impact). So come one and all with your well-reasoned opinions on this subject , and Dasher away! Just really looking for anything good written on the subject, unique ideas, etc.

P.S. I'm really not planning on starting any war, and may not even reply to anyone's posts like I usually do. So don't be Bashful - hmm, there's another one, but wrong genre. 

[JAHS]

I think many Bible scholars agree that Jesus may have been born sometime in the Spring. The fact that ‘there was no room for them in the inn’ (Luke 2:7) suggests that the birth probably occurred at the time of one of the three feasts, such as Passover, at which Jews were required to be in Jerusalem. The time of the Passover at the year 1 BC just happens to fall on or about April 6:

The same date of the following D&C scripture:
"The rise of the Church of Christ in these last days, being one thousand eight hundred and thirty years since the coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the flesh," (D&C 20:1)

Some argue that the phrase "one thousand eight hundred and thirty years since the coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the flesh", should be interpreted to mean that Christ was born exactly on April 6, 1830 years ago. Others believe that the phrase was not intended to fix the year of Christ's birth but was simply an oratorical mode of expressing the current year, which I tend to agree with. The recent discovery of the Book of Commandments and Revelations manuscript of D&C 20, show that the above phrase was actually an introductory head note written by early church historian and scribe John Whitmer — something he did for many of the revelations and therefore not actually part of that revelation written by Joseph Smith. 

Bruce R. McConkie stated in his "Mortal Messiah": 
"We do not believe it is possible with the present state of our knowledge-including that which is known both in and out of the Church-to state with finality when the natal day of the Lord Jesus actually occurred" (McConkie, Bruce R. Mortal Messiah, Vol. 1, p. 349, n. 2. Salt Lake City, 1979).

There are no records of Joseph Smith confirming that April 6 is the birth date of Jesus and the Church has no official position on this matter, although some individual church leaders have their own opinions on this.

 

[The Nehor]

Wait what? My family and I are all celebrating Smithmas. What is this weird holiday you are blathering on about? Some kind of paganism?

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

The recent discovery of the Book of Commandments and Revelations manuscript of D&C 20, show that the above phrase was actually an introductory head note written by early church historian and scribe John Whitmer — something he did for many of the revelations and therefore not actually part of that revelation written by Joseph Smith. 

Bruce R. McConkie stated in his "Mortal Messiah": 
"We do not believe it is possible with the present state of our knowledge-including that which is known both in and out of the Church-to state with finality when the natal day of the Lord Jesus actually occurred" (McConkie, Bruce R. Mortal Messiah, Vol. 1, p. 349, n. 2. Salt Lake City, 1979).

Thank you for that tidbit about the Book of Commandments and Revelations manuscript! I didn't know about that... I'm not very connected that way. 

I disagree with Bruce McConkie somewhat. I think there is enough information to have a good idea. One of the biggest issues I think is the version of Luke which blames the unavailability of rooms on a decree to tax everyone. There is just no indication that such a decree would ever require someone to return to their childhood home town. The Romans did not do that. In fact there is no record of a census or taxation decree close to 0 BC - and the Romans were pretty good record keepers. Some years prior there was a new governor of Syria, who may have stepped in for the province of Judea, and thus required a census. Maybe Joseph kept his money down south or some other reason requiring a journey, but I think it fair to say the facts are in dispute on the subject. I do agree with you that His birth was probably at the time of a festival. I think the festivals were foreordained at certain times for a reason. Since the Passover lamb was connected to the time of His death, I see no reason to believe it was supposed to mark the time of his birth. Thus, your comment about the Book of Commandments becomes relevant.

[Maidservant]

The Mass of Christ (Christmas) is a position in the liturgical year.  I do not have knowledge of when the liturgical year began, but the purpose of the liturgical year and its creation, establishment, and remembrance is not to provide historical dates, but to provide a year's cycle through the life of Christ and the Church, for the purpose of the understanding and personal transformation of the individual (who was not, at first, literate and was not, at first, reading the scriptures, which were in Latin).  Christmas is not meant to be understood without the rest of the liturgical year and the rest of the masses.  Especially the other positions that are leading up to and subsequent to the Christmas--the birth--but there are other positions, such as The Anunciation, and so forth.

As far as Luke, it has marks of hagiography, and I direct you to Wikipedia for more in depth on that.

[JLHPROF]

Personally, I'm an April 6th believer, although I acknowledge the evidence for it is spotty.  I just like the idea and it fits.

[RevTestament]

47 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Personally, I'm an April 6th believer, although I acknowledge the evidence for it is spotty.  I just like the idea and it fits.

Ah, good to see you JLHPROF. Break out the war helmets, and chainmail. aarrggh.  

[longview]

Do you agree that Christ was born on Passover week?  And He died on Nisan 14 during Passover week?  Does the BoM confirm this?

[Robert F. Smith]

51 minutes ago, longview said:

Do you agree that Christ was born on Passover week?  And He died on Nisan 14 during Passover week?  Does the BoM confirm this?

The chronology internal to the BofM makes it impossible for Jesus to have been born in the Springtime.  Jesus was most likely born in the Fall, probably on New Years (Jewish Rosh HaShana) and was circumcized during the following High Holy Days.  He cannot have died at any other time than Jewish Passover.

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, JAHS said:

...................................Bruce R. McConkie stated in his "Mortal Messiah": 
"We do not believe it is possible with the present state of our knowledge-including that which is known both in and out of the Church-to state with finality when the natal day of the Lord Jesus actually occurred" (McConkie, Bruce R. Mortal Messiah, Vol. 1, p. 349, n. 2. Salt Lake City, 1979)...............

As Kevin Barney has pointed out, however, BRM did take a stand on the  most likely date:

Quote

December, 5 B.C. J. Reuben Clark, Jr. rejected the April 6, 1 B.C. theory, and preferred a date of December, 5 B.C. in his Gospel harmony, Our Lord of the Gospels. Bruce R. McConkie in a lengthy note in his Messiah series examined the entire question, and concluded that he preferred Clark’s view. Thomas A. Wayment did a review of this issue, and suggested a date between Spring and Winter, 5 B.C., which is close to Clark’s position. The most recent LDS scholarly treatment is an article just published by Jeff Chadwick in BYU Studies, “Dating the Birth of Jesus Christ,” in which he concludes Clark’s view is correct.  http://bycommonconsent.com/2010/12/19/when-was-jesus-born/ .

Due to the known terminus ante quem of the death of Herod the Great,  most scholars put the birth of Jesus in 5 B.C.  As Kevin Barney further notes,

Quote

. . . we now know that the first year of Zedekiah is 597, and if Jesus was born somewhere between 4 and 7 B.C., we only have 590-593 years between those two events. Sorenson suggested that the “years” here were the Tun from the long-count calendar, a 360-day cycle without intercalation. 600 Tuns would have 3,150 fewer days than would 600 solar years (5.25 x 600 = 3,150), which converted to solar years (3,150/365.25) equals about 8.6 years difference. So 600 Tuns would be about 591.4 solar years, or just right to fit the chronology. And since the BoM is keeping track of time over long periods of time, I would think the long-count calendar would be more applicable; that is its whole reason for existence.  [see Barney, note 6]

Indeed, this is the only way in which to account for that careful countdown of 600 yeas.  It was never used as a "round number."

Edited December 20, 2018 by Robert F. Smith

[cinepro]

2 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Thank you for that tidbit about the Book of Commandments and Revelations manuscript! I didn't know about that... I'm not very connected that way.

 

Here's an article that discusses the recent findings...

What was the real date of Jesus' birth?

And, two steps forward and one step back...

Quote

Today is April 6. We know by revelation that today is the actual and accurate date of the Savior’s birth.

 

Edited December 20, 2018 by cinepro

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Maidservant said:

The Mass of Christ (Christmas) is a position in the liturgical year.  I do not have knowledge of when the liturgical year began, but the purpose of the liturgical year and its creation, establishment, and remembrance is not to provide historical dates, but to provide a year's cycle through the life of Christ and the Church, for the purpose of the understanding and personal transformation of the individual (who was not, at first, literate and was not, at first, reading the scriptures, which were in Latin).  Christmas is not meant to be understood without the rest of the liturgical year and the rest of the masses.  Especially the other positions that are leading up to and subsequent to the Christmas--the birth--but there are other positions, such as The Anunciation, and so forth.

As far as Luke, it has marks of hagiography, and I direct you to Wikipedia for more in depth on that.

Correct.  However, the current Christian liturgical year was taken wholesale from the Jewish liturgical year, which featured rites and quotations of Scripture during Autumn, which were later moved by the post-Jewish Christian Church to December in order to subsume pagan Solstice and New Year celebrations.  That is how we find ourselves now celebrating Xmas, Yuletide, Mistletoe, Tannenbaume, turkey, and eggnog in the Winter.  Its fun, but it has nothing to do with Jesus.

See Eric Werner, The Sacred Bridge: Liturgical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Church (N.Y.: Schocken Books, 1970), 79, 81, 89-92.

As the great scholar John Lightfoot long ago concluded:

Quote

Since Jesus offered himself as the Passover sacrifice, and bestowed the firstfruits of the  Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Lev 23:17, Rom 8:23), so it would be odd indeed were he not to fulfill an antitype at Tabernacles – when God came down and dwelt in his Tabernacle among the Israelites, and later in the flesh.  –“the word became flesh and tabernacled among us” (John 1:14 eskēnōsen)   Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae: Hebrew and Talmudic Exercitations upon the Gospels, the Acts, etc., new ed., 4 vols. (Oxford Univ., 1859), II:32-33.

Ray Vander Laan and Judith Markham, The True Christmas Story (Zondervan, 2002).

[Robert F. Smith]

17 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Here's an article that discusses the recent findings...

What was the real date of Jesus' birth?

And, two steps forward and one step back...

Quote

Today is April 6. We know by revelation that today is the actual and accurate date of the Savior’s birth.

 

In a church which does not have leaders trained in history or theology, one can expect such sincere but naive declarations.  In a church in which some very credulous people actually think the Brethren infallible, one may expect such declarations to carry some weight.  Few on this board are that credulous and uncritical.  That is the reason for this board, at least in part.

[RevTestament]

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The chronology internal to the BofM makes it impossible for Jesus to have been born in the Springtime.  Jesus was most likely born in the Fall, probably on New Years (Jewish Rosh HaShana) and was circumcized during the following High Holy Days.  He cannot have died at any other time than Jewish Passover.

Please outline this chronology more if you could. We do have 3 Nephi's statement about the sign of the time of his death being in the first month - which makes it seem like they were using the Mosaic calendar. I don't think the Babylonian calendar with the first month in the fall, got used until after the diaspora. There are biblical factors pointing to the fall as well. By High Holy Days, I assume you are speaking of Yom Kippur?

[sunstoned]

David Bednar has put this matter to rest.  This excerpt is from his April 2014 conference address:

Quote

May each of us do and become better through the Savior’s Atonement. Today is April 6. We know by revelation that today is the actual and accurate date of the Savior’s birth.

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/04/bear-up-their-burdens-with-ease?lang=eng

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, sunstoned said:

David Bednar has put this matter to rest.  This excerpt is from his April 2014 conference address:

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/04/bear-up-their-burdens-with-ease?lang=eng

If he was claiming revelation I would be inclined to agree with him but he seems to be suggesting we have written revelation to that effect which I do not believe we do which means he could just be honestly mistaken.

[halconero]

This is one of those topics I just can't find myself emotionally engaged with.

I state that only so I can peacock my apparent aloofness and intellectual superiority.

[longview]

7 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Please outline this chronology more if you could. We do have 3 Nephi's statement about the sign of the time of his death being in the first month - which makes it seem like they were using the Mosaic calendar. I don't think the Babylonian calendar with the first month in the fall, got used until after the diaspora. There are biblical factors pointing to the fall as well. By High Holy Days, I assume you are speaking of Yom Kippur?

I was thinking that the Mosaic "lunar" calendar could have remained in use by Lehi and his descendants all the way through the time of the Savior's Crucifixion.  Then Nisan 1 would have been New Years Day, Nisan 10 for selecting the Paschal Lamb (foreshadowing the triumphant entry into Jerusalem by the Savior on the back of a donkey), Nisan 14 for slaying the Passover (foreshadowing the great and last sacrifice of Christ).

One more thing:  I read somewhere that the shepherds that were visited by angels were actually temple priests watching over lambs consigned for the Passover?

[Jeanne]

38 minutes ago, halconero said:

This is one of those topics I just can't find myself emotionally engaged with.

I state that only so I can peacock my apparent aloofness and intellectual superiority.

Just doesn't matter to me either...

[RevTestament]

34 minutes ago, longview said:

I was thinking that the Mosaic "lunar" calendar could have remained in use by Lehi and his descendants all the way through the time of the Savior's Crucifixion.  Then Nisan 1 would have been New Years Day, Nisan 10 for selecting the Paschal Lamb (foreshadowing the triumphant entry into Jerusalem by the Savior on the back of a donkey), Nisan 14 for slaying the Passover (foreshadowing the great and last sacrifice of Christ).

As far as we know, the Lehites continued to use the lunar calendar. The Mosaic calendar set the first month or new year in Aviv, the month of Passover. Nisan was the Babylonian name for this month, but at the time of Christ the official new year was in the fall, about the time of Rosh Hashana. Everyone's birth year was set with it as was all official dates. Anyway, the Lehites wouldn't have known about Nisan. Nevertheless, the Passover had always marked the Mosaic new year, so that would be nothing new to the Lehites. The thing about this month is that it was set according to the ripening of barley, and the new moon. Kind of a toughie for Mesoamericanists, because I don't believe there was any barley or similar crop there. 

Quote

One more thing:  I read somewhere that the shepherds that were visited by angels were actually temple priests watching over lambs consigned for the Passover?

At the time of Yeshua, it seems what we know points to Bethlehem as the place where the temple sacrifices were reared. Whether the priests actually did this themselves is somewhat doubtful to me. They probably would have relegated the actual task of rearing and shepherding sheep, turtledoves, etc, to their sons, but I admit to not knowing enough Jewish custom at that time to answer positively. At the time of Yeshua the priests of the temple were wealthy, but I digress. Jewish custom assigned priests to the temple in courses. From the time of David, there had been assigned 24 courses of priests for this task which served weekly courses in the temple. However, all the priests served during the 3 weekly high times. This cycle got repeated twice per year to fill all the weeks of the year. We know this from Josephus and other sources. This actually  becomes relevant to determine the time of Christ's birth.

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, halconero said:

This is one of those topics I just can't find myself emotionally engaged with.

I state that only so I can peacock my apparent aloofness and intellectual superiority.

I don't mind your intellectual superiority so long as you share with us.  

I don't really think intellectual superiority is at issue -- but intellectual curiosity is another matter. I am naturally curious, and like to engage these types of topics - unsolved and unknowns.... and find that more good minds are better than one. As LDS we are instructed to seek the best learning when searching for truth. That's one of the things I loved about the Church when I discovered it.

It seems after studying the subject that simply using a little knowledge of Jewish traditions and what we know from the Bible and Book of Mormon will help to illuminate the subject. Add in a few relatively unknown twists of history, and we can get somewhere. 

For instance, from Luke 1 we learn that John the Baptist was apparently conceived probably right after the course of Abia. Then we learn that Yeshua was probably conceived about 6 mo later when Gabriel appeared to Mary and told her that her cousin was in her 6th month. What can we learn from this? Not much unless we know some Jewish tradition and when the course of Abia was. The sticky wick is that there would have been two courses of Abia per year. Nevertheless, assuming that John and Yeshua were conceived right after these announcements, this would give us two different times of the year Yeshua would have been born given a normal 9 month gestational pregnancy. I believe this works out to either a fall birth or a spring birth, but this is based on what we know about Jewish tradition - so we have that. And yes, for you proponents of spring, it was about the time of Passover. However, 6 months away lies the fall festival of Rosh Hashana....

[RevTestament]

15 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Wait what? My family and I are all celebrating Smithmas. What is this weird holiday you are blathering on about? Some kind of paganism?

Actually, it works out to be a Jewish holiday... not a pagan or American one.... I know.. a weird concept. Who would of thunk?

See my post above for more info...

Maybe one day soon Christmas will be replaced...the horrorrrrrrrr....  Personally, I would like to recognize Christ's birth at the right time...

Nevertheless, merry Smithmas to all your Nehorites....  

[blueglass]

6 hours ago, sunstoned said:

David Bednar has put this matter to rest.  This excerpt is from his April 2014 conference address:

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/04/bear-up-their-burdens-with-ease?lang=eng

I guess John Whitmer added this verse and it wasn't original to the revelation.

When Was Jesus Born?: A Response to a Recent Proposal

Lincoln H. Blumell and Thomas A. Wayment

BYU Studies Quarterly

Vol. 51, No. 3 (2012), pp. 53-81

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, sunstoned said:

David Bednar has put this matter to rest.  This excerpt is from his April 2014 conference address:

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/04/bear-up-their-burdens-with-ease?lang=eng

 

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

If he was claiming revelation I would be inclined to agree with him but he seems to be suggesting we have written revelation to that effect which I do not believe we do which means he could just be honestly mistaken.

A simple misreading of the D&C, as already explained in this thread.

[Robert F. Smith]

11 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Please outline this chronology more if you could. We do have 3 Nephi's statement about the sign of the time of his death being in the first month - which makes it seem like they were using the Mosaic calendar. I don't think the Babylonian calendar with the first month in the fall, got used until after the diaspora. There are biblical factors pointing to the fall as well.

The absolute termini post quem and ante quem enclose the only possible birthdates of Jesus based on Book of Mormon chronology, i.e., three dates must be correlated and aligned simultaneously:

(1) the date when Lehi left Jerusalem, 597 BC (I Nephi 1:4, 10:4, III Nephi superscription),

(2) the birth of Jesus 600 years later, Autumn 6-5 BC (Helaman 14:2, III Nephi 1:1, 2:8), and

(3) the death of Jesus in his 34th year and 4th day, Spring 27-28 AD (III Nephi 8:5).

Only a 360-day year count can coordinate those three required dates.  No other calendar works.  For example, the 360-day count loses 6 months in Jesus' 33-year life, and thus coincides with Autumn birth and Springtime death.  33 solar years would have a Passover to Passover sequence for his life.

The most spectacular celestial phenomenon was the Galactic Supernova in Capricorn, lasting 70 days (Mar - May 5 BC), on ecliptic -- Williams #52.  This may have set the magi on their long journey from Persia or Babylonia.

11 hours ago, RevTestament said:

By High Holy Days, I assume you are speaking of Yom Kippur?

Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) is merely the 10th of the High Holy Days (Days of Awe) which go from New Years to Day of Atonement.