A PROBLEM WITH DATES

Portrait of Shakespeare by Martin Droeshout, 1623

When was William Shakespeare born and when did he die? What did he look like?

These should be pretty knowable things. After all, Shakespeare breathed his last less that 400 years ago and nearly 1,600 years after Jesus Christ was crucified. This is not ancient history. Shakespeare lived after 1500 AD; the year generally considered the beginning of modern civilization.

There is his familiar likeness above and schoolbooks tell us he was born on April 23, 1564 and died on his fifty-second birthday, April 23, 1616.

Except we really don’t know for certain what he looked like and those birth-death dates, which are probably close and possibly correct, are merely conjecture, not established fact. The portrait above appeared on a Folio of Shakespeare’s work seven years after the playwright’s death rendered by a man who, in all likelihood, had never seen Shakespeare.  Every likeness since has been based on that portrait. There is no written description of Shakespeare’s looks or contemporary portrait in existence. (There have been a couple of paintings unearthed in recent years with claims of being made during Shakespeare life, but these are not authenticated.)

The portrait on the right is known as the “Chandos portrait”, after the 

former owners, the Dukes of Chandos. The painting has been attributed to John Taylor, but also to Richard Burbage. No one really knows if it was either or someone else. It is believed to been painted from life between 1600 and 1610 – it is believed, but not certain. It fact, it isn’t even absolutely certain subject is Shakespeare, although the National Portrait Gallery feels it probably is  -- meaning it possibly isn’t. It is noted that subsequent, posthumous portraits of the author were most likely based on the Chandos Portrait. 

As to the dates, his birth has been conjectured as April 23, 1564 because there is a baptism registry at Holy Trinity Parish Church in Stratford dated April 26, 1564. Since it was a common practice to baptize three days after birth, it is assumed his birthday was on the 23^rd. However, common practice is not certainty. Infants were sometimes baptized on the day of birth and sometimes not baptized until months later. 

Somewhat the same reasoning is used in establishing his death. His burial is registered in the same Stratford Church as April 25, 1616. How long before his funeral did he die? Well, April 23 makes for a convenient date because it is St. George’s Day and St. George is the Patron Saint of England.  What better date for England’s greatest writer to have been both born and died? Of course, there has been a long debate if Shakespeare actually wrote those plays that earned him that accolade.

The death of Julius Caesar occurred on the Ides of March (the 15^th), 44 BC or at least that is the preponderance of acceptance (notice I said acceptance, not evidence). There may be one problem if the writings of Pliny the Elder are accurate. Pliny was born the closest to the death of Julius than the other ancient historians, especially Plutarch, who we depend upon. Plutarch was born in 46 AD and Pliny was born in 23 AD. 

According to Pliny there was a solar eclipse in the year of Julius’ death sometime after he was dead. There were no visible solar eclipses in the Roman Empire during 44 BC or the immediate years around it. There was such an eclipse in August 49 BC.

Pliny also quotes Augustus Caesar as saying he saw, soon after Julius’ death, a comet in the northern skies over a period of seven days. Such a comet was recorded in 49 BC, but not in 44 BC. So was Julius Caesar actually assassinated in 49 BC instead of 44 BC?

I don’t know? Can we rely on the writing of one ancient historian? (Unlike other issues discussed throughout this document where multiple sources support the statements made, I have only found one source so far claiming that Julius Caesar died in 49 BC, Biblical Chronology. The information about solar eclipses and comets is supported elsewhere, but that these occurred during the year of Caesar’s death seems to rely mainly on the writings of Pliny the Elder. I would want further documentation on this one. The picture of Julius Caesar used here is part of a statue by Nicolas Coustou done in 1696. Did Julius really look like this?)

We do know Julius Caesar was stabbed to death by 23 men and his last words were, “Et tu Brute?” Right?

Well, maybe, maybe not. We really aren’t sure of Julius’ last words. Suetonius wrote they were “You too, child?” Plutarch wrote Julius uttered no last words. It was Shakespeare who put the words “Et tu Brute” into Caesar’s mouth, you know the guy who may or may not have been born and died on April 23 and may or may not have written “Julius Caesar”.

How many men assassinated Julius Caesar? One credible source says 23 men, another says 37 did and yet another says 60 men were involved. More honest accounts admit the number isn’t known.

Let’s step back even further in our list of great men to Alexander the 

Great. We hear much about this man with little question as to the veracity of the accounts of his life. It is interesting that critics attack the accuracy of biographies of Christ’s life because they were written dozens of years after his departure, but except willingly the biographies of Alexander written 500 years after his death. (To this day, exactly how Alexander died is uncertain.) His date of birth is categorically given as either July 20 or 21 of 356 BC. This is based on Alexander being born on the Hecatombacon Sixth of the Athenian Festival Calendar. However, the Athenians were very sloppy calendar keepers or we should say calendars, for they had a second calendar for the political year. Hecatombacon was the first month of the Festival calendar and in theory began on the first new moon after the summer solstice. We say theoretically because the astrological, civil and religious calendars did not agree on when the months began, how many there were in a given year or how many days long they were. Despite the statement that Alexander was born on July 20 or 21 of 356 BC, the truth is it is impossible to really know.

This raises the subject of our own modern calendar and the birth of Jesus, whom it is supposedly based upon. After all, BC stands for “Before Christ” and AD is short for “Anno Domini”, which means “In the Year of Our Lord”. (You will notice I stand by these designation rather than the more recent attempts to secularize the division by using BCE “Before the Common Era” and CE “Common Era” (although these designations still have their division based on the life of Christ, but don’t tell the secularists who deceive themselves into believing changing the name changes the facts.)

It is problematic establishing conclusive dates, especially dates in ancient history. Obviously we can have difficulties because there was not always a standardized calendar, as we have seen with the Greeks. Various countries and people had their own means of counting time. The Jews and Romans, for instance, based their calendars on moon cycles, while we use a calendar today based on the earth’s orbit of the sun. 

The standardized worldwide calendar of our time is called the Gregorian calendar.  There was a partially standardized calendar prior to the Gregorian called the Julian calendar. Although both are based on the revolution of the Earth around the Sun, they did have a slight difference in the count of days and had to be adjusted. Both require a leap year every four years. However, leap years were erroneously added every three years early in the use of the Julian and this over time resulted in a loss of ten days.

Although the Gregorian corrected some of the errors of the Julian calendar, it presented some problems of its own. Years in the Gregorian were dated from the birth of Christ. Years after his birth were counted forward and those before his birth were counted backward. The span of someone who lived in AD would be shown as 1900-1970 AD, while a person born in BC would be shown as 1970-1900 BC. There is no year zero, which further adds confusion. Some people think 2010 is the first year of a new decade, but in reality it is the last year of the current decade; 1999 was not the last year of the previous century, 2000 was. Our current century began on January 1, 2001.

Furthermore, 1 AD is not correct as the first year of Christ’s life, which is a matter of considerable dispute.

The Julian and Gregorian Calendars are not that old relatively. The Roman’s had a rather messy Calendar up to Julius Caesar. One big problem with it was politicians and others would change it to curry favor, thereby making exact dating difficult. This Calendar had become such an unreliable tool by the time of Julius Caesar that he had a new Calendar created. This was the Julian calendar. It was created in 46 BC and went into use in 45 BC. This was replaced by our modern calendar in 1582 under the auspices of Pope Gregory XIII, for whom it is named.

One of those fringe issues that divert people’s attention to the Gospel truths about Jesus is the debate over his birth date.  Information given by Luke and Matthew about certain personages is often used to try and pinpoint the year.

In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was {governor} of Syria.) And everyone went to his own town to register. Luke 2:1-3

After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem and asked, "Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him." Matthew 2:1-2

There isn’t much doubt that Caesar Augustus, Quirinius and Herod the Great were contemporaries around the period where BC ended and AD began. However, one question raised is the status of Quirinius during the time prior to 1 AD. It is accepted that Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was Governor of Syria by 6 AD, but not earlier. Remember though, we are dealing with ancient times fraught with questionable histories and dating procedures, not to mention missing or unknown records. Still, there are several possible answers to the Quirinius Question.

The word translated in Scripture as “governor” was  “hegemon”, which means “ruling officer or procurator”. Quirinius did not become actual governor {legatus – different word} until later, but there is no reason to dispute Luke calling him a ruling officer at this time. Quirinius was serving in an official governing position in the last decade of BC (and there were many censuses taken during this period of time, any number of which could have been this one).

Other legitimate possibilities have their defenders. One is that Quirinius served as governor more than once and there is archeological evidence to the effect he did so serve during the later years of BC. A second proposition is there was another man named Quirinius. (Names are another area of confusion in ancient times and two people are often mistaken as one and the same. Sometimes one individual is also thought to be two different individuals because they went by more than one name.) Another argument is that Luke’s Greek was translated wrongly and should have been translated as “before Quirinius was governor of Syria.” Yet, another argument is that Jesus was actually born between 5 and 8 AD.  This argument hinges on the theory that Herod the Great died in 8 AD, not 4 BC and there are proponents who make a case for 8 AD. (Personally, I am not among those who place Christ’s birth that late.)

Now, why does Herod’s death date come into the discussion?  Because Herod (pictured right as portrayed in “The Bible Series on History”) was alive 

when Jesus was born according to Matthew. It was commonly accepted that Herod died in 4 BC and thus estimated that Jesus was born in 5 or 6 BC. (It is sometimes assumed Jesus must have been a child about two years old when the Magi visited and told Herod when the Star first appeared. Why? It was assumed so because Herod ordered all boys in Bethlehem up to the age of two to be killed. This is only conjecture. Herod may very well been playing it safe, overkill as it were, and Jesus may have still been an infant when the Magi came. I personally believe Jesus was closer to two.) 

But nothing is set in stone when we deal with dates two thousand years ago. So when did Herod die? Well, pick a year: 6 BC, 4 BC, 1 BC or 8 AD. In many reference books it will say he died in 4 BC. However, more recent evidence suggests he died in 1 BC. 

Part of the difficulty is much about Herod relies upon the works of Titus Flavius Josephus (37 – 100 AD – pictured left). Josephus wrote a twenty-volume history called “The Antiquities of the Jews” and an eight-volume history called “The War of the Jews”.  Josephus wrote two accounts concerning the life of Herod the Great, but these contain inconsistencies and discrepancies on events and the age of Herod at the time events occurred.

There are very good arguments based on known information that Herod died later that 4 BC and I am leaning toward the persuasions that he died in 1 BC. (You can find more information supporting this in the Catholic Encyclopedia, in Novum Testamentum by Andrew E. Steinmann or at www.bethlehemstar.net among others. (I recommend bethlehemstar as a very thought provoking theory that Christ was born in June of 2 BC, the Magi arrived in Bethlehem in December 2 BC (on the 25^th no less) and that Herod died in 1 BC.)

I believe all the swirling debates over dates are inconclusive, circumstantial and speculative, and do not affect the truth or accuracy of Scripture. I trust the Scriptural account more than any questionable opinions written by men, including my own. I take the stand the account of Jesus’ life is true and accurate according to the Word of God. We should concentrate on the story of salvation, rather than be diverted into irresolvable bickering over dates. There exists enough evidence to support any apologetic of supposed conflicts within the Bible to render criticism mote and inconsequential.

One final consideration, in looking backward from a distance, we mustn’t forget contemporary acceptance. Certainly we have record of those enemies of Christ who brought accusations against him, the Apostles and the early Church. These included calling Jesus and his Disciples drunkards, claiming Jesus was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier and spreading a rumor his disciples stole the body from the tomb. These are smear campaigns much as we see today between political opponents. There are theological debates and arguments within the church over procedural and devotional matters. But there isn’t dispute over historic facts. 

Luke addressed both his Gospel and Acts to Theophilus, for instance (refer to “Luke’s Introduction” ).  If Luke’s information about the personages mentioned or issues such as the census were incorrect, Theophilus most likely would have caught the error and informed Luke of it. Why would Theophilus be receptive to a second volume, Acts, if he saw major errors of recent history in the first volume? 

We mustn’t lose sight that when Luke and the others wrote their accounts and letters there were those alive familiar with the facts. If a biographer of John F. Kennedy wrote that Mark Chapman assassinated him in Denver in 1959, there would be many, many people quick to complain to the publisher about these errors because they had been alive at the time and remembered it was Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas in 1963. Subsequent editions of the biography would correct this or the book would soon be assigned to the junk heap and oblivion. Why would we think grievous errors in Luke or by any other Gospel writer on the daily news of their times would escape contemporary notice?

INTRODUCTION

Adam and Eve by Raphael (Raffaello Santi of Urbino), 1509-1511.

When God created Adam and Eve the world was good. They fell into disobedience and sin was brought into the world. This tainted everything and brought death to all. But before the creation God had a plan in place to restore mankind. Even as he put a curse on the world, he made this promise of a future redeemer:

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. Genesis 3:15

Although created by God, Adam and Eve inclined toward their own desires and by listening to Satan man became the Devil’s adopted offspring. But there would be a future offspring of woman, one not of any man, who would eventually crush the head of evil. His name would be Jesus.

However, in those early times, men grieved God so much by their depravity he considered wiping all off the face of the Earth. Still, he remembered his promise of The Redeemer and God never breaks a promise. God found one righteous man and his family to save a sample of each living creature. Noah was not the promised Redeemer of course. Noah did not redeem mankind. He merely preserved it and allowed it to start anew. The sinful nature that began with Adam was preserved along with mankind and the promise of a coming Redeemer was still needed.

Among the survivors, of the Flood God had used to destroy his creation were Noah’s three sons. All the people living upon the planet today descended from those three.

The inhabitants of what we call the Middle East basically descended from Shem. Thus they are known as Semites.  Shem’s grandson was Eber. Jewish tradition holds that Eber refused to help in the building of the Tower of Babel and he was allowed to retain his own language, the original language of mankind. Eber’s descendents were Eberites. However, the name Eber was sometimes shown as Heber (I had an Uncle Heber named for him) and in time his descendents and their language was called Hebrew. A further descendent of Eber was Abrams, who was renamed by God as Abraham. He was to become the great patriarch of the Hebrews and they were God’s Chosen people from whom the Redeemer would one day come and they were to show God’s way to the world. (The name Jew referred to those of the Tribe of Judah, but the name eventually came to mean all those of the Hebrew faith.)

Despite the fresh start, as the population grew, people again turned to wickedness, even the Chosen People. God sent prophets to warn them and call them to repentance, but they ignored and sometimes even killed these messengers. Finally, God dispersed the Hebrews and sent many into captivity in Babylon. The country of Israel and Judah was taken from them and Jerusalem and the temple destroyed. The Law itself was lost to the people for decades.

In 539 B.C., King Nabonidus surrendered Babylon to the Persian King Cyrus without a fight.  Within the year, the first Jews were allowed to return to their former homeland. By 516 B.C. a new temple had been built.

Ezra, accompanied by about 5,000 former exiles, arrived out of Babylon in 458 B.C. Nehemiah was overseeing the building of a reconstructed wall around Jerusalem, and after its completion in 445 B.C., Ezra stood and read the Law of Moses to the assembled people. (The Book of the Law had been rediscovered during construction.) Since the Law had been lost, the people were overjoyed at hearing it again. They forsook idols and returned to accepting the One and Only Mighty God.

Despite these incredible events, a mere 15 years later the Jews had strayed again. They were sacrificing blemished animals, showing their disrespect to God, and they were marrying foreigners. Why was it bad to marry foreigners? Because God had promised a redeemer and he had promised this redeemer would be a direct and unblemished descendent of Abraham and of David. If the Jews continued to marry with foreigners that ancestry would be lost and God’s plan could not be fulfilled.

So in 430 B.C., God raised up a prophet named Malachi who warned the Jews of coming judgment if they didn’t repent. His prophecies came with assurances of God’s love for them and a promise of salvation. And so it was with these words in Malachi quoting God that the Old Testament comes to an end:

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. Malachi 4:5-6

We have 400 silent years between the Old and New Testaments; between the prophesies of Malachi and the Birth of Our Lord, Christ Jesus. Much changed in the world in those years.

Alexander the Great defeated Persia in 331 B.C. King Darius was killed by his own men. Alexander went on to rule the known world until 323 B.C., when he died under mysterious circumstances.

His empire was divided among four of his top generals and split into four sectors ruled thusly: Seleucus (Asia), Ptolemy (Egypt), Lysimachus (Thrace) and Cassander, son of Antipater over Macedonia/Greece. (Many think of Cleopatra VII [69 B.C. - 30 B.C.] as Egyptian, but she was Macedonian/Greek being the last Ptolemy ruler of Egypt, which upon her death became part of the Roman Empire. Her father was Pharaoh Ptolemy XII Auletes his sister, Cleopatra V Tryphaena, was most likely her mother. (Cleopatra VII was married to two of her own brothers, before having her famous liaisons with Julius Caesar and Marc Antony.)

The Jews, after Alexander, came under Seleucid rule. However, when the Seleucid King Antiochus defiled the Jewish Temple in 167 B.C. (a foreshadowing of the future Antichrist), Judah Maccabeus led a Jewish Army, which defeated the Seleucids. This began what is called the Hasmonean Rule of Palestine. However, in 63 B.C., the great Roman general Pompey captured Jerusalem and Israel once again lost its independence and came under Roman Rule.

In 42 B.C., Mark Antony appointed Herod tetrarch of Galilee. The Jews resented him because he wasn’t a Jew. He was an Idumean with an Arabian mother. (Idumea was the Greek name for Edom, which bordered Judea on the south. This was a land populated by the descendents of Esau, Edom being another name of his. Esau was the brother of Jacob. The Edomites were perpetual thorns in the side of the Israelites. Given the history between Israel and Edom, it is no wonder the Jews were not happy to have Herod named their king.)  During the Parthian War, Herod had to flee because the Jews sided with the Parthians. But after the war and order was restored, Rome reinstated Herod as the sole ruler of Judea. Thus in 37 B.C., Herod the Great was King of the Jews. He was ruling when Jesus was born.

During the Hasmonean Rule arose three important factions among the Jews: Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.

The Pharisees were spiritual leaders to the extreme. They not only embraced the Law, but also began to add to it their own interpretation and traditions. They did, however, believe in an afterlife, the judgment of the wicked and a coming Messiah.

The Sadducees were an elite priestly group, yet liberally embraced Greek ways into their lives. They insisted on a literal interpretation of the Law rejecting the ideas of the Pharisees, including resurrection. Their lives revolved around ritual and the Temple. They disappeared from history with the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.

The Essenes didn’t like either of the other two groups. They became monks, moved to the desert and strictly obeyed dietary laws and being celibate. They are associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls.

During this time a body came into existence known as the Sanhedrin (sitting together). It was a ruling institution for the Jews, a sort of Supreme Court and legislature rolled into one. It consisted of 71 Jewish elders and was presided over by a President and a Chancellor. Members of the Sanhedrin did not gain a seat by election. The supplanted a sitting member on the council be establishing superior knowledge of the Law. (Nicodemus and Saul [Paul) held seats in the council at times.) Both Pharisees and Sadducees were members of this group.

Another group often mention is Scripture were the Scribes. These were akin to attorneys.

So when we come to the beginning of the New Testament and the birth of Jesus, the world is quite different than it was when Malachi talked of a coming prophet like Elijah. The Persian Empire has been replaced by the Roman Empire. The King of Judea is not of the line of David, but a non-Jew named Herod. The Jewish religion and tradition is not being directed by God’s chosen prophets, but is in the hands of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes. It is also a time when many Jews are earnestly expecting the promised Messiah to come as a king that will defeat Rome and rule as David once did. This is the world at the time the Christ came.

PART I

BIRTH OF CHRIST

Birth of Christ by Antoine Pesne, 1745

ETERNAL EXISTENCE OF CHRIST AS THE SECOND PERSON OF THE TRINITY

The Trinity by El Greco (Domenikos Theotocopoulos), 1577

Genesis 1:1-4 and John 1:1-5; 9-13

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

And God said, “Let there be light:” and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And the light shined in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. That was the true Light, which lights every man that comes into the world. [The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world. (NIV)]

He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came to his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

HISTORICAL GENEALOGY OF JESUS FROM ABRAHAM THROUGH JOSEPH

St. Joseph with the Jesus Child by Guido Reni, c. 1620-1630

Matthew 1:1-17

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren. And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

And Jesse begat David the king and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias. And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa. And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias. And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias. And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias. And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon.

And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel. And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor. And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud. And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob. And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generation

LEGAL GENEALOGY OF MARY

Virgin with Child and Rosary by Bartolome Esteban Murillo, circa 1870

Luke 3:23b-38

[Jesus] being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son [-in-law] of Heli. Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph. Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge. Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda. Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri. Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er. Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi. Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim. Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David. Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson. Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda. Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor. Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala. Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech. Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan. Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Why do these Gospel writers bother giving these genealogies?  One reason is the Messiah had to be a descendent of Abraham, through Isaac, through Jacob through Judah. Another reason is God promised the Messiah would be a son of David, meaning a male of the line of King David. There were also legal implications. Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, showing he was a descendent of King David through David’s son Solomon. Luke gives Mary’s genealogy and we see she also descended from King David through his son Nathan. These genealogies establish that Jesus was of the tribe of Judah on both sides and also of royal blood on both sides. Although Jesus was not the natural son of Joseph, Joseph was legally recognized as his father and it was the father’s line that was important as far as the authorities of the law would have been concerned. At any rate, Jesus had an established claim to being an heir to David.

It is unusual though for Mary’s genealogy to be included. Why was it?

A study of these genealogies would probably yield many interesting facts. For one, there is an unusual inclusion of women in the record. Women were not generally counted in the genealogies, but there are five mentioned in the ancestry of Jesus.

The first mentioned is Tamar (traditional held to be a daughter of Shem.). She was the wife of Judah’s oldest son, Er, unfortunately Er was so wicked that God put him to death childless. As was the custom of the times, Judah then ordered his second son, Onan, to give Tamar a son to carry on the name of his brother Er. (A surrogate father, remember this practice when you read the question of the Sadducees to Jesus about who is married to whom in Heaven.) Onan was selfish. He didn’t want to father a child who wouldn’t carry his own name, so he practiced coitus interruptus. The result of this was Tamar didn’t get pregnant and Onan died.

Judah was running out of sons. He had a third, Shelah, but was afraid marrying Tamar might be the death of Shelah too, so since the boy was still young he told Tamar to wait until he was fully grown. But when he did grow up, it didn’t happen, most likely because Judah was still afraid Tamar was sure death. Of course, by withholding Shelah, Judah was breaking the laws of inheritance and being unfair to Tamar.

Judah’s wife died and he went away or awhile in his grief. Tamar was impatient to have a child, so she went ahead of him, put on sexy clothes and waited by the road. He saw her there, paid her as a prostitute to sleep with him and as a result she finally got pregnant. He didn’t realize who she was, but he gave her some keepsakes.

A few months later Judah was informed his daughter-in-law was guilty of prostitution and was pregnant. He was going to have her burned to death for her sin, but she said, “Remember these keepsakes?”

Tamar was spared. Judah never slept with her again. She gave birth to his twin boys, Perez and Zerah. At the birth, a hand came out and the midwife tied a scarlet thread to the wrist before the hand was pulled back and Perez was born. Then the child with the scarlet thread finally came out and was named Zerah.  Although Zerah was officially the first because of his hand, it is Perez who became the direct ancestor in this legal line of Jesus. (Read Genesis 38.)

The next woman mentioned as an ancestor of Jesus is Rahab. Rahab is a prostitute, not just playing one as Tamar had done, and she is not an Israelite. She lives in Jericho where Joshua has sent spies as he prepares to attack it. Rahab hides the two spies in her house and then aids their escape from her roof. In return, they tell her to tie a scarlet cord in her window. When the city is later sacked, this cord identifies Rahab and her family and keeps them safe. (Read Joshua 2.)  Rahab later marries Salmon and becomes the Great-Great-Grandmother of King David.

Rahab was the mother of Boaz, which brings us to the third woman, Ruth. Ruth wasn’t Jewish either. She was a Moabite.  The story of Ruth is a portrait of the Redeemer-King and a picture of our Savior. (Read the Book of Ruth.)

The fourth woman isn’t mentioned by name. She is identified as having been Uriah's wife. This, of course, is the infamous Bathsheba. The story of David and Bathsheba is hardly a stellar point in the life of King David. It involves seduction, adultery and murder. (You can read all about it in 2 Samuel 11.)

Tamar, Rahab and Bathsheba are not exactly the type of personage we might expect to be ancestors of The Christ, which probably teaches us we shouldn’t judge anyone by their ancestors.

The last woman mentioned is Mary.

We probably can’t leave the genealogies without mention of Jeconiah (also known as Coniah and Jehoiachim, the son of Jahoiakim). God put a curse on Jeconiah-Jehoiachim:

As I live, said the LORD, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck you thence; And I will give you into the hand of them that seek your life, and into the hand of them whose face you fear, even into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, and into the hand of the Chaldeans. And I will cast you out, and your mother that bare you, into another country, where you were not born; and there shall you die. But to the land whereunto they desire to return, thither shall they not return. Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? Is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? Wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land, which they know not?

O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the LORD. Thus say the LORD, Write you this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah. Jeremiah 22:24-30

Now we discover why it was important to include Mary’s genealogy. You see Joseph was a descendent of Jeconiah-Jehoiachim and ineligible to sit on David’s Throne because of the curse. Although Joseph was required to be recognized legally for Jesus’ inheritance, if he was the biological father of Jesus then Jesus would not be allowed to sit on David’s throne. However, Jesus was not Joseph’s son, was not of the bloodline of Jeconiah. Joseph descended from Solomon. Mary descended from one of David and Bathsheba’s other sons, Nathan. This made Jesus a blood descendent of David who was eligible to ascend David’s throne. Both genealogies mattered.

THE ANGEL’S APPEARANCE TO JOSEPH

"The Dream of Joseph" circa 1640 AD by Georges de La Tour.

(Nazareth B.C. 5)

Matthew 1:18-25a

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily. [Secretly or privately. The NIV translates this as: “He had in mind to divorce her quietly.”]

There is some interesting information in the last sentence. If Joseph did not want to expose her to public disgrace, Mary's condition was probably not widely known. Perhaps it was confided and confined to her immediate family and Joseph. At any rate, Joseph had every right to divorce her under the Law. He would have cited Deuteronomy 24:1, "If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house..." (NIV) This certificate of divorce was called a "Get" and would have been considered merciful on Joseph's part considering the punishment available for adultery. A Get would have accomplished three things. One, it would have severed any marital obligations between Joseph and Mary; two, it would have freed Mary to marry another man if she wished and it would have legitimized any child born to that marriage. Here are the basic rules for a Get:

(1) The parties appear before a rabbi learned in the laws of divorce, a scribe, and two witnesses.

(2) The husband requests that the scribe write the GET for his wife, which the scribe then proceeds to do using a special quill pen.

(3) The husband declares that he is giving the GET of his own free will, and the wife concerning its receipt makes a similar declaration.

 (4) At this point, the GET is then signed by the two witnesses.

 (5) The parties are again questioned as to whether they are giving and accepting the GET voluntarily.

 (6) The husband takes the GET and drops it directly into his wife’s cupped hands, stating: "This is your GET and accept this as your GET, you shall therewith be divorced from me, you are untied free and permitted to any man".

 (7) She then places the GET under her arm and symbolically leaves by turning and moving several steps away.

 (8) The divorcée then returns and the GET is taken from her by the officiating rabbi who tears the GET crosswise; and

 (9) finally, the divorced woman is given a Divorce Certificate to prove her divorced status, and the process is over.

It says Joseph wanted to do this quietly. He would not have been required to place blame in order to obtain a Get, he could simply claim his displeasure in Mary. He would not necessarily had to spell out what the indecency was he found in her. Obviously, her condition would become apparent. Perhaps the plan also included sending her away somewhere. Mary and Joseph were betrothed, which was as binding as marriage, but did not include consummation. If Mary were seen as pregnant, people would assume either Joseph and Mary had not remained pure in their betrothal or Mary had committed adultery. Joseph would probably have desired to avoid either accusation.

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, fear not to take to you Mary your wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and you shall call his name JESUS [Hebrew: Joshua, which means God is Salvation]: for he shall save his people from their sins.”

Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.” [Isaiah 7:14]

Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took to him his wife and knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

There are some who claim Mary and Joseph never had sex or children of their own. Here in Matthew 1:25 is the first of several passages in Scripture that refute that idea. They restrained from consummation of their marriage vows until sometime after the birth of Jesus. If Mary and Joseph had denied their bodies to each other as man and wife, they would have been committing sin against each other and the commands of God. (See Genesis 1:28; Genesis 2:24; Ephesians 5:25-33 for example.) 

This also took great faith on Joseph's part, because by doing so he would bring some condemnation on himself for not restraining himself and his wife during the betrothal period. I am sure people were no different then than now and much whispering went on around the town speculating on just how and by whom Mary had become pregnant. Probably the rumor that she had been either raped or had an affair with a Roman soldier began here.

P.S.: In de La Tour's painting, Joseph appears as quite old. Often we see Joseph portrayed as much older than Mary and although it is possible he was a few years her senior, it seems more likely he and she were both quite young given the customs of the time. Mary may even been as young as twelve or thirteen and Joseph himself may have been a teenager. We really don't know their actual age at this time from any authentic source.

So why have classical artists often painted Joseph as this old man?

There are apocryphal writings, such as "The Story of Joseph the Carpenter", that contend Joseph had been married prior to Mary and was of quite an advanced age. According to these traditions, Joseph married one Melcha (sometimes called Escha) when he was forty years old and they lived together 49 years before she died. During their marriage, Joseph and Melcha had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was known as James the Less.

Now a year after Melcha died, for reasons I really don't know, these priests send a message throughout Judea for a worthy man to Marry this twelve or thirteen year old girl named Mary. So Joseph, this ninety-year man, makes the trek to Jerusalem to apply as the groom and gets selected.

This idea caught on that Joseph was this very old man at the time of Christ's birth. I think one of the reasons this story was perpetuated came from the belief of some that Mary remained eternally a virgin after Jesus was born. There is a belief in some churches that Mary and Joseph never had any sexual relationship in their marriage, a situation I stated was a sin and violation of God's will. However, those who hold that this was the case faced the problem when Scripture mentions Jesus' brothers and sisters on occasion. This story then resolves the problem by claiming Joseph had a previous marriage and Jesus had half-siblings. Joseph would have been free to marry Mary because his first wife had died. (The same apocryphal stories claim Joseph died at the age of 111, which would have his demise coming halfway between Jesus' presentation at the Temple at age twelve and His ministry beginning at age 30.)

This whole idea that Mary remained a virgin and never had marital relations with Joseph is not Scriptural at all. The elaboration of a previous marriage for Joseph just shows the lengths some will go to rather than accepting what Scripture clearly tells us. Scripture tells us that Jesus had brothers and sisters who were the children of Joseph and Mary. Matthew tells us, "When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son." (NIV) The form of that last statement indicates that after the birth of Jesus they did have normal marital relationships.

JESUS PRESENTED IN THE TEMPLE

The Circumcision by Tintoetto (Jacopo Comin aka Jacopo Robusti), 1587

(Jerusalem, eight days after the birth; distance from Bethlehem to Jerusalem is 6 miles)

Matthew 1:25b and Luke 2:21

And when eight days had passed, before His circumcision, His name was then called Jesus, the name given by the angel before He was conceived in the womb and [Joseph] called his name JESUS.

Having heard the Nativity repeated over and over most of our lives; we tend to run these events together as if they happened in a couple days time. It seems obvious that the Angels appeared to the Shepherds on the day Christ was born, but other events didn’t come about until certain passages of time.

Here is something to consider. We celebrate the birth of Christ on December 25, but it may be more likely this was the time of his conception, perhaps during Hanukkah. I tend to agree that Christ was born during the Feast of Tabernacles in late September of 5 BC. If we follow the schedule of priestly duties for Zechariah and the other historic data, this seems logical. I believe the Jewish Holy days have prophetic significance and you can see how Christ was crucified and rose on days related to Passover and the Holy Spirit came on Pentecost. Elijah is expected on Passover and I think there is an argument to be made that John the Baptist was born on Passover. John's birth would align with the conception time based on Zechariah's serving in the Temple on schedule. John was six months older than Jesus and if Passover came in late March of that year, this would have placed Jesus' birth near the end of September. This also fits with the Shepherds still being in the fields with their sheep before winter came.

If Mary did conceive during Hanukkah, John the Baptist would have been born three months later at Passover. And assuming a normal pregnancy of 285 days, Jesus would have been born on the 15th day of the Jewish month of Tishri (September 29 by modern reckoning). This is significant because it is the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot). It is a high day, a special Sabbath, a time of great rejoicing.

There is a credible theory that Christ was born in June of 2 BC. This is based not only on the facts given in the Gospel accounts concerning events, but also on the alignment of the constellations and the conjunction of Jupiter and it’s path that may have been the “star” guiding the Magi. In this timetable, Jesus would have been conceived in September 3 BC, the Magi would have arrived in Bethlehem in December and Christ would have been born the next June. [Google www.bethlehemstar.net for a fuller explanation.]

 PURIFICATION

(Jerusalem, 40 days after birth according to Jewish Law)

Luke 2:22-39a

And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; (As it is written in the law of the LORD, Every male that open the womb shall be called holy to the Lord [Exodus 13:2]) And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.

Under the Law of Moses a woman was considered impure after the birth of a child. For the first seven days she and her husband would refrain from any sexual relations. For the next 33 days she will not be allowed to touch anything considered holy or visit the sanctuary. At the end of this 40-day period, she is required to bring a sacrifice to the priest. Mary and Joseph followed the law as spelled out in Leviticus.

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.

And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.

And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.

And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest, who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.

And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean. Levitcus 12:1-8

And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon [which means “he heard” or “obedient”]; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ. And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,

Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said, “Lord, now let me your servant depart in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared before the face of all people; a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.”

And Joseph and his mother marveled at those things, which were spoken of him.

And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, “Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against; (Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.”

And there was one Anna [which means “Grace”], a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, [which means “Face of God”; the apocryphal Book of Enoch gives the name Phanuel to the fourth Archangel] of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity; and she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fasting and prayers night and day. And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise to the Lord, and spoke of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem. And … they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord.

We do not know much about these two people. Both were elderly, both spent much of their time around the Temple and both were glad to see the baby Jesus.

Simeon, we are told, was promised he would see the Messiah. He bears the name of one of Jacob’s sons. This was the brother of Joseph who was held prisoner in Egypt until his younger brother, Benjamin, was brought to Joseph. There seems little connect beyond the name other than the Simeon in Luke was waiting on the consolidation of Judah and Israel. Simeon was a prisoner on hold to the consolidation of his family and Jacob with Joseph. Jacob is a name also used to refer to Israel.

Simeon in Luke does prophesy about Jesus being a light to the gentiles and to His crucifixion.

We don’t know much about Anna either except the few bits Luke mentions. Anna or Hannah shares the same name as the mother of Samuel and parallels can be drawn between Samuel’s birth and youth and that of Jesus. There is speculation that Anna’s family roots stretched to the Jews held in Media who returned to Israel after the Babylonian Diaspora. For this reason, it is though when she “spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem”; she was referring to the time when all of the Jews would once again be brought together as a nation. This would be similar to what we have stated Simeon was doing.

Here we are a little over a month and a week since Jesus was born. Mary and Joseph are following the Law and Tradition of the Jews. They had Jesus circumcised on the eight day. This was the seal of the Abrahamic Covenant between God and Abraham in Genesis 17: 4-12 (NIV):

 "As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham,^] for I have made you a father of many nations. I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God."

 Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring.

Then they took Jesus for dedication in the temple at the end of the purification period for Mary, where they offered the required sacrifice to the priest.

Note that Mary and Joseph gave what the law required, two doves or two young pigeons. This was the requirement for the woman who couldn’t afford a young lamb. Now this is something some have pointed to in saying Mary and Joseph were poor; however, not being able to afford the price of a young lamb doesn’t necessarily mean they were poor. It has been over a month, so it seems they have remained and established residence in Bethlehem. This trip and stay may have depleted whatever money they had with them on arrival. They certainly appear to be making a new home in Bethlehem, for we will find them still living there in a house when the Magi arrive.

This sacrifice also indicates the Magi had not yet visited because if so they most certainly would have bought a young lamb from the treasures the Magi gave them.