![]() |
![]() |
The Lord's true nativity is set clearly forth in chapter 1 of Luke; one has but to count 6 months from the conception of John the Baptist (at the close of the course of Abijah (Abiah)) when Mary told her cousin (a full-blooded Levite) that she was with child. We then add 9 mos gestation to arrive at the Lord's true birthday in late september. Teaching contrary to this reckoning, MAY constitute the teaching of "another Gospel" as referred to in Galatians Chapter 1. That judgement lies above my pay grade. SELAH!This Is Appendix 179 From The Companion Bible.I. Parallel Datings of the Times of Our Lord.
A.M. = Anno Mundi; that is to say, in the year of
the world.
PARALLEL DATINGS OF THE TIMES OF OUR LORD.
DATES OF "THE BEGETTING" (he gennesis, Matthew 1:18,20 (see Revised Version marg.). John 1:14-) OF OUR LORD AND HIS BIRTH. (Luke 2:7. John 1:-14.) [ At this point EWB had a 280 line day for day Jewish - Gentile calendar date comparison; for the sake of ease of reference on a pc it has been omitted ed.]
The 15th of Ethanim (or Tisri) was the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles. The Circumcision therefore took place on the eighth day of the Feast = 22nd Ethanim = October 6-7 (Leviticus 23:33-43). So that these two momentous events fall into their proper place and order, and the real reason is made clear why the 25th of December is associated with our Lord, and was set apart by the Apostolic Church to commemorate the stupendous event of the "Word becoming flesh" - and not, as we have for so long been led to suppose, the commemoration of a pagon festival. An overwhelmingly strong argument in favour of the correctness of this view lies in the fact that the date of "the Festival of Michael and All Angels" has been from very early times the 29th day of September, on Gentile (Western) reckoning.
But "the
Church" even then had lost sight of the reason why this
date rather than any other in the Calendar should be so
indissolubly associated with the great Angelic Festival.
The following expresses the almost universal
knowledge or rather want of knowledge of
"Christendom" on the subject: "We pass on now
to consider, in the third place, the commemoration of September
29, the festival of Michaelmas, par excellence. It
does not appear at all certain what was the original
special idea of the commemoration of this day" (Smith
Dictionary of Chr. Antiqq. (1893), volume ii, page
1177 (3) ).
A reference, however, to the Table and
statements above, make the "original special
idea" why the Festival of "Michael and All
Angels" is held on September 29 abundantly clear. Our Lord
was born on that day, the first day of the
"Feast of Tabernacle" (Leviticus 23:
The "Begetting"
(gennesis) Day of the Lord was announced by the
Angel Gabriel. See notes on Daniel 8:
The "Birth" Day, by "(the)
Angel of the Lord", unnamed in either Matthew and Luke.
That this Angelic Being was "Michael the
Archangel" (of Jude The fact of the Birth of our Lord having been revealed to the shepherds by the Archangel Michael on the 15th of Tisri (or Ethtanim), corresponding to September 29, 4 B.C.-the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles-must have been known to believers in the Apostolic Age. But "the mystery of iniquity" which was "already working" in Paul's day (2 Thessalonians 2:7) quickly enshrouded this and the other great fact of the Jewish month Tebeth (corresponding to December 25, 5 B.C.)-as well as other connected with His sojourn on earth,4-in a rising mist of obscurity in which they have ever since been lost. The earliest allusion to December 25 (modern reckoning) as the date for the Nativity is found in the Stromata of Clement of Alexandria, about the beginning of the third century A.D. (See note 3).5 That "Christmas" was a pagan festival long before the time of our Lord is beyond doubt. In Egypt Horus (or Harpocrates 6), the son of Isis (Queen of Heaven), was born about the time of the winter solstice.7 By the time of the early part of the fourth century A.D., the real reason for observing Christmas as the date for the miraculous "begetting" of Matthew 1:18 and "the Word becoming flesh" of John 1:14 had been lost sight of. The policy of Constantine, and his Edict of Milan, by establishing universal freedom of religion furthered this. When many of the followers of the old pagan systems-the vast majority of the empire, it must be remembered- adopted the Christian religion as a cult, which Constantine had made fashionable, and the "Church" became the Church of the Roman Empire, they brought in with them, among a number of other things emanating from Egypt and Babylon, the various Festival Days of the old "religious". Thus "Chirstmas Day," the birthday of the Egyptian Horus (Osiris), became gradually substituted for the real Natalis Domini of our blessed Saviour, videlicet: September 29,or Michaelmas Day. If, however, we realize that the centre of gravity, so to speak, of what we call the Incarnation is the Incarnation itself- the wondrous fact of the Divine "begetting", when "the Word became flesh" (see Matthew 1:18 and John 1:14) - and that this is to be associated with December 25 instead of March - as for 1,600 years Christendom has been led to believe - then "Christmas" will be seen in quite another light, and many who have hitherto been troubled with scruples concerning the day being, as they have been taught, the anniversary of a Pagan festival, will be enabled to worship on that Day without alloy of doubt, as the time when the stupendous miracle which is the foundation stone of the Christian faith, came to pass.
The
"Annunciation" by the Angel Gabriel marked the
gennesis of Matthew 1:18, and the
first words of John 1:14.
The announcement to the shepherds by the
Archangel Michael marked the Birth of our Lord. John
1:
The paragraph should read thus:
The word
tabernacled here (preserved in Revised Version
marg.) receives beautiful significance from the knowledge that
"the Lord of Glory" was "found
in fashion as a man" , and thus tabernacling
in human flesh. And in turn it shows in equally beautiful
significance that our Lord was born on the first day of the great
Jewish Feast of Tabernacles, videlicet: the 15th of
Tisri, corresponding to September 29, 4 B.C. (modern
reckoning).
The main arguments against the Nativity having taken place in December may be set forth very simply:
To take advantage of such a time would be to the Romans the simplest and most natural policy, whereas to attempt to enforce the Edict of Registration for the purposes of Imperial taxation in the depth of winter, - when travelling for such a purpose would have been deeply resented, and perhaps have brought about a revolt,-would never have been attempted by such an astute ruler as Augustus. With regard to the other two "Quarter Days", June 24, March 25, these are both associated with the miraculous (Luke 1:7) "conception" and the birth of the Forerunner, as December 25 and September 29 are with our Lord's miraculous "Begetting" and Birth; and are therefore connected with "the Course of Abiah."
"THE COURSE OF ABIA" (Luke 1:5).
This was the eighth of the priestly courses
of ministration in the Temple (1 Chronicles
24:10), and occurred, as did the others, twice in the year.
The "Courses"were changed every week,
beginning each with a Sabbath. The reckoning commenced on the 22nd
day of Tisri or Ethanim (Appendix 51. 5). This was the eighth and
last day of the Feast of Tabernacles = the "Great Day of the
Feast" (John 7:
The first course fell by lot to Jehoiarib, and the
eighth to Abia or Abijah (
Bearing in mind that all the courses
served together at the three Great Feasts, the dates for the two
yearly "ministrations" of Abiah will be seen to fall as
follows:
The first
The second ministration was from 12-18 Sivan = June
13-19.
The announcement therefore to Zacharias in the
Temple as to the conception of John the Baptist took place between
12-18 S
The day following the end of the "Course of
Abia" being a Sabbath (Sivan 19), he would not be able to leave
Jerusalem before the 20th.
The thirty miles journey would probably occupy, for
an old man, a couple of days at least. He would therefore arrive at
his house on the 21st or 22nd. This leaves ample time for the
miraculous "conception" of Elizabeth to take place on or
about 23rd of S
But the same influences that speedily obscured and
presently obliterated the real dates of our Lord's
"Begetting" and Birth, were also at work with regard to
those of the Forerunner, and with the same results. As soon as the
true Birth day of Christ had been shifted from its
proper date, videlicet: the 15th of Tisri (September 29), and a
Festival Day from the Pagan Calendars substituted for it (videlicet:
December 25), then everything else had to be altered too.
Hence "Lady Day" in association with
March 25 (new style) became necessarily connected with the
Annunciation. And June 24 made its appearance, as it still is in our
Calendar, as the date of "the Nativity of John
the Baptist", instead of, as it really is, the date of his
miraculous conception.
The Four "Quarter Days" may therefore
be set forth thus: first in the chronological order of the events with
which they are associated, videlicet:
or, placing the two sets together naturally:-
1 ZUMPT fixes Quirinus' (Cyrenius') First Governorship as 4 B.C. to 1 B.C. Justin Martyr thrice says that our Lord was born under Quirinus (Apol. 1. XXXIV, page 37; XLVI, page 46; Dial. LXXVIII, page 195. Clarks edition). 2 According to some, Augustus died August 19, A.D. 14. Therefore if Tiberius' co-regnancy was for two years before Augustus' death his first year was 765 A.U.C. = 12 A.D.. His fifteenth year consequently was A.U.C. 779 = 26 A.D. = 4030 A.M. and A.C. 30, for our Lord was thirty years of age when He begun His Ministry (Luke 3:23). Clement of Alexandria gives the years of Augustus' reign as being 43-46, according to different reckonings in his day. 3 According to Clement of Alexandria (compare A.D. 190-220) "Our Lord was born in the twenty-eighth year when first the census was ordered to be taken in the reign of Augustus" (Stromata, Book i, see Clark's edition i. pages 444-445). If that is correct, and it is true that a Census was taken every fourteen years, then the next would fall in A.D. 10, and the succeeding one would have been due A.D. 24. 4 Notably the day of the crucifixion, etc (see Appendix 156 and Appendix 165). 5 His statements are, however, very vague, and he mentions several dates claimed by others as correct. 6 Osiris reincarnated. 7 See Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, Volume III, page 79 (Birch's edition). 8 It is true that the Lebanon shepherds are in the habit of keeping their flocks alive during the winter months, by cutting down branches of trees in the forests in that district, to feed the sheep on the leaves and twigs, when in autumn the pastures are dried up, and in winter, when snow covers the ground (compare Land and Book, page 204), but there is no evidence that the Bethlehem district was afforested in the manner. 9 Reckoning of course from Ethanim or Tisri - the First month of the civil year. The sacred year was six month later, and began on 1st Nisan. 10 The "city" is not named (possibly Juttah, some 30 miles to the south of Jerusalem). 11 The conception of John Baptist was, in view of Luke 1:7, as miraculous as that of Isaac; but it is not necessary to insist upon the complete period of forty sevens in the case of Elizabeth. Therefore the birth of the Forerunner may have been three or four days short of the full two hundred and eighty days, - as indicated in the above table.
|