For many people, especially non-Christians who celebrate Christmas, it doesn't really matter what date Jesus was born. After all, they are just celebrating the modern day festival season without the connection of anyting about Jesus.
It may seem strange to Christians who wonder why non-Christians would celebrate a holiday named after the Christ Mass. But if you look into the history of the holiday, you will realize it was the Christians who hijacked the winter festive celebration and not the other way around. Whether you call it Christmas or not, the celebration is pretty much as it has been a few thousand years ago and has evolved into what we have now. No one really owns the right to that day.
No one knows the exact date of the birth of Jesus. Chrisitan purist and historians use the biblical description believing that his birth probably occurred in September, six months after Passover. It is very unlikely that Jesus was born in December during a cold Judean winter, since the bible records shepherds tending their sheep in the fields on that night.
So why do we celebrate Christ's birthday as Christmas, on December the 25th? For this we can thank the pagans of Babylon who celebrated the feast of the Son of Isis on December 25.
In 350, Pope Julius I declared that Christ's birth would be celebrated on December 25. There is little doubt that he was trying to make it as painless as possible for pagan Romans who were the majority at that time to blend in with the restrictive new religion.
For Christian purists, it does become an issue of curiosity. After all, they are celebrating (or in some cases not celebrating) a holiday that is being attributed to the day of birth of the leader of their religion, Jesus.
Record keeping was not up to the standards we have today. Especially at the hands of those who were not among the wealthy, the judicial families or the religious class families. Oral history was the norm for everyone else and would fit in perfectly given the fact that Jesus was not exactly born in a position to have official notice taken or documented. He was just another child born, so this information would not have been readily available or counted as important to one of the most famed historical record keeper of the time, Josephus.
The best estimate, therefore, would have to come from the documents left behind by the disciples of Jesus who had to depend on oral stories of the birth of Jesus and to try to compare those descriptions with accounts of actual, documented events of the time. Also note, the apostles who did write the very conflicting stories of the birth [and death] of Jesus were not present for either and therefore are hearsay accounts based on stories that tended to grow with the passage of time. From a logistic point of view, those stories are without factual proof - no way of proving these events actually happened, therefore to a non-believer, no proof of Jesus as a diety.
Luke 1:5 says Jesus was born when Herod was King of Judea. Luke 2:2 also states that Jesus was born when Cyrenius was governor of Syria. Herod was king from 37 BC to 4 BC. Cyrenius did not even come into power until 6AD, almost a decade after the death of Herod. This is where one has to try to fuse pieces of oral history against facts. Given just that set of facts one could either write off both accounts or try to estimate Jesus was born any time between 37BC to 6AD.
Then there is the account at Luke 2:1-4 which mentions that around the time of Jesus' birth that Caesar Augustus [Roman Emperor] ordered everyone in all the world [the Roman Empire] to return to the city of their ancestors to be counted [census] and taxed. Since Joseph, Jesus' earthly father, was in the family of David, he had to return to Bethlehem where Mary gave birth to Jesus in the manger as there was no room at the inn due to all the incoming people.
Josephus mentioned a census conducted in Judea in 6AD, but this was only a local census, not one to tax the whole empire, but just the people of the newly acquired Jewish land which recently became part of the Roman Empire. Its purpose was to count only the male population to be taxed at a later time. Around the time of Jesus' birth, the Jews were still subjects to King Herod.
At the time Jesus was born, it was only the areas under direct Roman rule that Caesar Augustus would have had the power to tax directly. Plus, there is no record of a mass migration of adults to their ancestral cities in order to be registered. This would have been an impractical way to hold a census as the primitive transportation systems of the Roman Empire would have been totally inadequate to handle the flow of people.
So if you want to use the date of the census and taxation to pin point the date of the birth of Jesus, it would lead you to 6AD, but the actual record does not back it up and leaves this story in the category of oral tradition. This still leaves it between 37BC to 6AD.
Matthew 2:16 tells about King Herod's order to murder all boys under the age of two. One would think such an event, if it did happen, would have been recorded by not only Josephus (who wrote in great detail about even minor actions and decisions of Herod), but surely the Romans would have loved to record such a barbaric act to cast its newest conquest in a negative light. The date of that mass murder would give an approximate idea of Jesus' birth.
According to historians these killings never happened. If the children were killed, then historians of the era would have been certain to have recorded the event. The mass murder was never mentioned. So this has to be discounted as an oral tradition.
Luke 2:8 says shepherds were living in the fields and keeping watch over their flocks at night. If this were the case, one would have to take into account the seasonal weather of this region that would allow the shepards to be in the fields at night.
If it were December, it would be too cold and wet for the sheperds to be in the field with their flocks and the herd would have been moved into the safety and warmth of the pens, especially at night.
According to the Talmud, the flocks were put out to grass in March and brought in during the beginning of November. This means if we were to believe the account at Luke, Jesus could only be born sometime in the late spring, summer, or early fall. Not in mid to late fall and definately not winter.
Many scholars point out, using Biblical scriptures, that the birth was most likely during what we now call September or October. This is assuming John was born in the spring and by the time the angel came to Mary, John's mother was already 6 months along. To assume a 9 month pregnancy, this would put Jesus' birth around September or October.
On top of the other reaches one must use to pinpoint the date of Jesus' birth, you must also take into account the differences in the calendar used which can throw off all estimates (with the exception of the seasonal birth estimate) by +/-15 years.
I dread to touch upon the Star of Bethlehem, as it confuses the issue even further for us skeptics who believe such an event as described in the Bible is more legend than truth. Here it goes.
The Magi approached Herod proclaiming to come from the East and saw a star in the East [presumably talking about the location from which they came otherwise there would be no way they were from the East and following a star facing the east only to end up in the west.] Herod asked them exactly when they saw the star [something which most likely would have been recorded if true]. Herod then sent them off to find him. [Matthew 2:2-9]
If the star could be positively identified, it would be easier to pinpoint a more accurate time which could give an exact month and year. If it were a supernova, ancient sources record two in 134BC and 173AD. If it were a comet, there were recordings of these events in 17BC, 5BC, 4BC and 66AD, but as these were considered signs of doom, it is not likely this star was a comet. Sometimes people have been known to confuse planets as stars and in 7BC there was a reported strange alignment and passing of the planets Jupiter and Saturn. So since there can be no real accounting for any specific type of star, it is often told to be just a miracle seen only by the Magi.
Most Biblical scholars will concede that Jesus was born between 4 and 7 BCE and some time between September and October.
And exactly where was Jesus born?
According to Micah 5:2, the Messiah would be from Bethlehem "a ruler who will be the shepherd of my people Israel."
According to Matthew [Matthew 2:1] Jesus was born in Bethelem in Judea. The Magi, who followed the star, was eventually led to the house where the mother and child were to shower them with gifts [Matthew 2:10-11.] Then in a dream, the same night, Joseph was warned to run to Egypt and stay until the death of King Herod (4BC) [Matthew 2:13-14]. When Herod realized he was tricked, he order all baby boys under 2 killed (so again, this assumes Jesus could have been up to 2 years old by this point) [Matthew 2:16]. Then when the danger passed he went to Israel, but still afraid of the new King and warned in a dream, decided instead to move his family to the district of Galilee in the town of Nazareth [Matthew 2:19-23].
According to Luke [Luke 2] Joseph was living with his bride to be Mary in Nazareth and was required to go to his hometown in Bethlehem. Jesus was born in Bethlehem and stayed in a manager as all the inns were full. The shepards who were in the field came over to praise the newborn. They stayed for 8 days to go through with the obligation of circumcision where he was given the name Jesus. After meeting with others in the temple convinced that this was the savior, they left to go back to Nazareth.
Note the differing accounts. Either both accounts are untrue, a glorified legend, or the truth lies in between the two. There were no official records of such a birth, so neither account can be proven.
Bottom line, Jesus was born sometime between 37BC to 6AD and he was raised in Nazareth. These are the only things that can be pointed out and backed by historical events and by matching Biblical scripture.
It is typical among many cultures of the time to pass on oral tradition. This is just one of those cases. Oral tradition is based upon something that did happen, but tends to get played up to make it more interesting. Only those who are living on explicit faith of the "mysteries" in the Bible which cannot be explained will be satisfied the story of Jesus' birth proves His divinity. To everyone else, it proves nothing more than Jesus was most likely an ordinary person from a lowly background who had a vision of a spiritual nature and had a following of people who embellished a history for this man they only knew as an adult.
So keep that in mind so as to not get too dogmatic about the specifics of the birth of Jesus. Just remember the point of the holiday. In the Christian version of the holiday, it is to honor your savior's day of birth which cannot be known. For everyone else, it is a holiday to enjoy, who needs a reason!
Return To Holidays
