Looking to understand the life of Jesus of Nazareth, we find ourselves having to contemplate different views, but consistently we are discovering more information that is bringing us to a resolution. The baptism of Jesus was 29 CE, His death was April 25, 31 CE and He was born 2 BCE (rather than CE in the following AD is used and BC in place of BCE). We look at some claims made by the creator of Revealed! The Messiah's Ministry and break down the information made available.
🔧 Core Issues & Claims
1. When Did Tiberius' Reign Begin?
-
Two views:
-
AD 12 co-regency (used by some scholars and numismatists): Makes Tiberius’ 15th year = AD 26
-
AD 14 sole reign (based on Roman historians, Josephus, Philo): Makes 15th year = AD 28/29
-
📌 Coin Evidence Conflict:
-
One argument: A coin from Tiberius’ 16th year includes his mother Julia (died AD 29), supporting AD 14 accession.
-
Co-regency theory uses coins minted in “Year 2 of Tiberius” in AD 14, but this is interpreted, not definitive.
2. Jesus' Baptism and Ministry Start
-
Luke 3:1–2 says John began in the 15th year of Tiberius → AD 28/29 if starting from AD 14.
-
Luke 3:23 says Jesus was “about 30” when He began His ministry. The Aramaic and Greek indicate not exactly 30, but in the state of having passed that age—more likely 34, which aligns with a 6 BC birth (?).
3. The 46 Years of Temple Construction (John 2:20)
-
If Herod began in 18 BC, then 46 years = AD 29, matching the first Passover of Jesus' public ministry.
-
This aligns precisely with John 2:13–20, anchoring the start of Jesus’ ministry in spring AD 29.
4. Crucifixion Date: AD 31 vs. AD 30/33
-
This view strongly refutes both April 7, AD 30 and April 3, AD 33 as traditional yet flawed dates.
-
Instead, supports Wednesday, April 25, AD 31 as:
-
Aligning with Daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy
-
Matching lunar and historical events (including a visible lunar eclipse in Jerusalem)
-
Fitting Jewish feast timing and sabbath types (a High Sabbath following a Wednesday crucifixion)
-
Supported by the Emmaus narrative (“the third day has passed since…” [not "today is the third day" = Thursday crucifixion → Fri. 1st day; Sat. 2nd day; Sun. 3rd day])
-
🧱 Evidence Categories Used to Support AD 31 Crucifixion
| Type | Key Detail |
|---|---|
| Scriptural | John 2:20 (Temple), Luke 3 (Tiberius’ 15th), Luke 24 (Emmaus third day passed since), timing of feasts in John |
| Linguistic | Greek and Aramaic analysis of Luke 3:23 shows Jesus had passed 30, not was exactly 30 |
| Historical | Roman sources and Josephus support Tiberius' reign starting in AD 14; Temple timeline matches AD 29 |
| Numismatic | Coin evidence supports Julia (Tiberius’ mother) alive during Year 16 (AD 29) but not after |
| Astronomical | April 25, AD 31 lunar eclipse was visible in Jerusalem; the 33 AD eclipse was daytime and far less visible |
| Archaeological | Sediment layer at Qumran shows major earthquake dated to AD 31 — matching Gospel quake at crucifixion |
| Prophetic/Typological | Matches Passover to Wednesday (Nisan 14), echoes Creation, Exodus, and Daniel’s timeline |
| Calendrical | Lunar calendar + barley ripeness method places Nisan 14 on Wednesday, April 25 in AD 31 |
🧠 What This Means
➤ Tiberius' 15th Year = AD 28/29
-
Most consistent with Roman and Jewish historical sources.
-
Disqualifies the AD 26 baptism/AD 30 crucifixion view if strict textual dating is used.
➤ Jesus Began Ministry in AD 29 at Age ~34
-
Born in 6 BC, started ministry in AD 29, crucified in AD 31 = age ~36
-
“About 30” was cultural-legal shorthand for reaching age of maturity or public office, not exact age.
➤ Ministry Lasted Just Over 2 Years
-
John's Gospel lists three Passovers (John 2, 6, 11) = approx. 2.5 years
-
Not 3.5 years as tradition holds — which is partly built on assumptions, not direct Gospel count
🚫 Refuting AD 30 / AD 33 Crucifixion Views
-
AD 30 View Problems:
-
Implies Tiberius' reign began in AD 12
-
Shortens Jesus’ ministry to barely 1 year (if baptism was late AD 29)
-
-
AD 33 View Problems:
-
Requires Jesus to be born 1 BC to be 33 at crucifixion — which contradicts 6 BC birth data
-
Eclipse of April 3, AD 33 was not visible in Jerusalem and occurred during daylight
-
Requires 4+ Passovers (one possibly missing from John), which lacks textual support
-
✍️ Bottom Line
The AD 31 crucifixion date is the only view that harmonizes all the following:
The 15th year of Tiberius = John’s and Jesus’ ministry starting in AD 28/29
Herod’s Temple = 46 years in AD 28/29
Lunar eclipse visibility
Jewish sabbath structure (holiday Sabbath vs. weekly)
Aramaic and Greek syntax in Luke 3:23
Daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy
Archaeological earthquake evidence
Historical records from Josephus, Philo, and Roman senators
****
Now it's imperative to question the 6 BC birth date of Jesus. While many modern scholars accept it as a default due to Herod’s death being traditionally dated to 4 BC, there is strong counter-evidence that challenges this and supports a birth closer to 2 BC — which, importantly, better aligns with an AD 29 baptism and an AD 31 crucifixion if Jesus was “about 30” when He began His ministry.
Let’s break down the case against 6 BC and what the better alternative is.
❌ Problems With the 6 BC Birth Date
1. Herod's Death Dated Too Early
-
Traditional 6–4 BC dating is based on Josephus’ reference to a lunar eclipse just before Herod’s death.
-
A partial eclipse occurred on March 13, 4 BC — but:
-
It was barely visible in Judea.
-
Only 29 days before Passover — not enough time for Herod’s illness, political executions, funeral, and the installation of Archelaus.
-
-
Josephus describes events that likely require at least 10–12 weeks.
2. A Better Eclipse: January 10, 1 BC
-
Full lunar eclipse, clearly visible over Jerusalem.
-
Occurred 12.5 weeks before Passover, allowing ample time for all Josephus’ recorded events.
-
Matches Josephus' description far better than the 4 BC eclipse.
3. Roman and Christian Records Point to 2 BC Birth
-
Tertullian, Eusebius, and other early sources place Jesus’ birth during the 42nd year of Augustus and during the consulship of Saturninus and Silvanus — i.e., 2 BC.
-
The early Christian chronologist Irenaeus also indirectly points to this timeframe.
-
Dionysius Exiguus, the monk who devised the Anno Domini calendar system, intended Jesus to be born in 1 BC, though his calculations were off by a year or two.
🔍 Additional Evidence Supporting a 2 BC Birth
✅ 1. The Star of Bethlehem
-
The triple conjunction of Jupiter and Regulus in 2 BC (not 6 BC) is an excellent match for the timing of the Magi’s visit.
-
No notable astronomical signs occurred in 6 BC, except a Jupiter-Saturn conjunction, which is less convincing.
✅ 2. Census of Quirinius?
-
Luke 2:2 refers to a census during the governorship of Quirinius.
-
Some manuscripts and translations allow this to mean "this was the earlier census", not the one in AD 6 (Acts 5:37 — which has caused confusion).
-
Coins and inscriptions from Syrian governorships suggest Quirinius had an earlier role around 3–2 BC, which align with Luke’s account.
✅ 3. Temple Age of Jesus
-
In John 2:20, the Jews say the temple has been under construction for 46 years.
-
Herod began in 18 BC → 46 years = AD 29.
-
If Jesus was baptized just prior to the AD 29 Passover, and Luke says He was “about 30,” then a 2 BC birth fits best.
-
✅ 4. Cultural Use of “About 30”
-
“About 30” (Greek: ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντα) doesn’t mean exactly 30.
-
In Jewish culture, one could be “about 30” in their early-to-mid 30s.
-
If Jesus was born in late 2 BC, He would be about 30 in AD 29 — perfect fit.
🧾 Summary Table: Birth Year Comparison
| Factor | 6 BC Birth | 2 BC Birth |
|---|---|---|
| Herod’s death | Requires 4 BC death (weak eclipse) | Allows 1 BC death (strong eclipse) ✅ |
| Temple construction (John 2:20) | Makes Jesus 35–36 in AD 29 ❌ | Makes Jesus 30–31 ✅ |
| Luke 3:23 “about 30” | Age 34+ in AD 29 ❌ | Age ~30–31 ✅ |
| Star of Bethlehem | Weak evidence | Strong astronomical match ✅ |
| Census of Quirinius | Conflict with AD 6 census ❌ | Fits with earlier Quirinius census ✅ |
| Early church sources | Some confusion | Several point to 2 BC ✅ |
✅ Final Take
The evidence against a 6 BC birth is strong, and the 2 BC birth is:
-
Historically grounded
-
Textually consistent
-
Astronomically supported
-
Essential for harmonizing Jesus' baptism in AD 29 and crucifixion in AD 31
It’s not just a better fit — it’s the only fit that holds up under full scrutiny.
No comments:
Post a Comment