The date of birth of Jesus the Messiah

According to our interpretation of the 70 weeks, or 490 years, announced by the prophet Daniel, and taking as a starting point the decree of King Artaxerxes reported in Ezra 7.1-28, we arrive at the date of April 3, AD 33. This date corresponds to one of the two possibilities provided by the Gospels for the resurrection of Jesus the Messiah, and it agrees with the analysis of the prophecy of Daniel 9.24-27.

Going back 3.5 years from this date, a duration corresponding to the first half of the last prophetic week, we place the baptism of the Messiah in the month of October AD 29, which corresponds to the month of Tishri 3790 in the Hebrew calendar. This chronology agrees with the time structure described by Daniel and is confirmed by the prophetic duration mentioned by the apostle John in Revelation 11.3, which refers to a period of 1,260 days, equivalent to three and a half years.

The testimony of Luke 3.23 indicates that Jesus “was about thirty years old” when he began his ministry. Going back thirty years from the year 29, we obtain a date of birth in October of the year 2 BC, which agrees with the landmarks provided by the Gospels and with the historical context of the era of Herod the Great (Matthew 2.1).

Furthermore, Luke 1.3 states that the evangelist undertook careful research in order to establish an orderly account of the events. Although he was not one of the apostles nor a direct witness of the earthly ministry of Jesus the Messiah, Luke was a travel companion of Paul, author of thirteen epistles of the New Testament (Colossians 4.14, 2 Timothy 4.11). His privileged position within the early Christian communities gave him access to eyewitnesses and to the leaders of the nascent Church, which reinforces the historical reliability of his testimony.

Thus, by combining the prophetic data of Daniel, the chronological indications of the Gospels and the known historical landmarks, we propose a coherent and well-argued estimate of the date of birth of Jesus the Messiah: October 2 BC.

Daniel mentions a period of 7 years, marked by a central event in the middle of this period (Daniel 9.27). The apostle John, in Revelation 11.1-3, provides additional details about this period. According to him, the first part is devoted to the prophets, while the second is linked to the Antichrist — show definition INF265.

According to our analysis, there are two periods called the “70th week”: the first period is associated with John the Baptist and Jesus the Messiah, while the second period concerns two prophets, followed by the Antichrist — show definition INF265. These periods are described as similar. For detailed information, please refer to our chapter 5: The prophet Daniel, as well as to the appendix ANN067: The theories of Anderson and Denney.

Using this data, the beginning of the ministry of Jesus the Messiah can be dated approximately around Tishri 29 (April AD 33 - period of 3.5 years). The month of Tishri includes three important feasts:

• Rosh Hashanah (Jewish New Year — show definition INF275) in 3790: 1 Tishri 3790, corresponding to September 25, AD 29.
• Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) in 3790: 10 Tishri 3790, corresponding to October 4, AD 29.
• Sukkot — show definition INF208 (Feast of Tabernacles) in 3790: 15 Tishri 3790, corresponding to October 9, AD 29.

Rosh Hashanah, being secular in character, can be excluded from this analysis because it does not involve a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. On the other hand, Sukkot — show definition INF208, being one of the three major feasts of Judaism, seems a more plausible candidate for significant events, such as the birth or baptism of the Messiah.

According to the writings of Luke, who state that Jesus was about 30 years old at his baptism, it is possible to place this event around Yom Kippur in the year 29, and his birth during the feast of Sukkot — show definition INF208. This interpretation matches the idea that Sukkot — show definition INF208 symbolizes the presence of God on earth.

The ministry of Jesus the Messiah begins with his baptism.

We will first put forward two hypotheses: the 30 years noted by Luke 3.23 are accurate, give or take a few days, and we are during an important Jewish feast, which explains the lack of room for lodging in the Jerusalem region. We are thinking of the feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot — show definition INF208).

We have already pointed out that the latter, Sukkot — show definition INF208 (Tabernacles), is special, because together with Pesach (Passover) and Shavuot (Pentecost) it is one of the three major feasts of Judaism involving a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.

The lack of room for lodging in the Jerusalem region can only be explained by the presence of many pilgrims. Indeed, the census of Quirinius, conducted by King Herod, cannot cause such a movement of population.

At that time the great majority of people were born, lived, married, worked and died in their village or nearby.

Moreover, the few population movements observed in the 1st century, motivated by poverty, tended to head toward Galilee, which was a more abundant land than Judea.

The Sea of Galilee — show definition INF087, teeming with fish, provided all the food needed by the local population. The arrival of these new workers led to overexploitation, so that in the time of Jesus the apostles fished all night without catching anything!

Jesus the Messiah was about 30 years old, according to Luke 3.23, at the start of his ministry in October AD 29. It lasted 3.5 years, which is confirmed by the information from the apostle John. The calculation is elementary: starting from the date of his death, April 1, AD 33, subtracting these 30 years and the 3.5 years of ministry, we arrive at the year 2 BC.

33 – 30 = year 3

3 – 3.5 = year -1.5 BC

-1.5 – 1 = year -2.5 BC (year 0 does not exist in our calendar)

If Jesus the Messiah was born in October of 2 BC, we must first consider the absence of a year zero in order to calculate his age in the year 33.

Let us review the calculations:

From 2 BC to 1 BC: 1 year

From 1 BC to AD 1: 1 year (since there is no year zero)

From AD 1 to AD 33: 32 years

Adding these periods, we obtain 1 + 1 + 32 = 34 years.

Jesus the Messiah is living his 34th year; he would have been 34 in October 33, but in April 33, 6 months earlier, he is only 33.5 years old.

As for Luke’s information, “about 30 years,” we understand it as in his thirtieth year, and therefore he was not 31 or more; in that case Luke would have written: about 31 or 32 years.

Luke does not seek symbolism but historical accuracy, so that his account may be credible and accepted; this is, moreover, what he affirms Luke 1.3.

According to our calculation we arrive at the feast of Tabernacles in the year 2 BC. This feast, which lasts 7 days, begins on 15 Tishri. The Jews celebrate the assistance of God who is present in the midst of his people.

Our date therefore falls between 15 Tishri and 22 Tishri, between October 11, 2 BC and October 18, 2 BC.

We are fully aware that many historians claim that the death of King Herod the Great took place in 4 BC. Matthew’s statement poses a real problem.

We invite you to read the appendix ANN011: The date of the death of King Herod the Great, to better understand that this king’s death can be placed in 4 BC but also in 1 BC.

We also note that Luke indirectly confirms Matthew’s statements.
We can easily observe that the birth of Jesus the Messiah in 2 BC was self-evident to several Church fathers and to ancient historians or writers. We will come back to these testimonies in more detail.

Thus this historical readjustment, though it may prove surprising to many today, was a certainty for many in the first centuries of Christian history.

According to the Gospel information, the birth of Jesus the Messiah could correspond to the beginning of the feast of Tabernacles, that is, 15 Tishri 3760. Our date converters indicate this day as Saturday, September 11 of the year -1, which is equivalent to the year -2 in the Gregorian calendar (without a year 0). To determine this date, one must first locate the Passover feast after the spring equinox, then add six months.

The 14 Nisan of the corresponding year falls on Wednesday, March 17 of the year -1. Since this date is before the equinox of March 21, an additional month (Adar II) is added to the Jewish calendar that year, placing 14 Nisan on April 16, -2. Thus, six months later, the feast of Tabernacles begins on October 11, -2.

For more information, please consult the appendix ANN014: The Jewish calendar.

Taking into account a one-month offset with the astronomical calendar, we assume that Jesus the Messiah was born on 15 Heshvan 3760, which would correspond to 15 Tishri as defined by the Sanhedrin — show definition INF003. We believe the birth took place on October 12, 2 BC.

Although this choice is arbitrary, it is plausible that the fatigue of the journey triggered Mary’s labor a few days after their arrival, at the beginning of the feast around October 12.

We may be surprised to find that Luke takes care to leave us a detail, seemingly unimportant: “of the division of Abijah”!

Zechariah was performing his priestly duty when the angel Gabriel revealed to him that his wife Elizabeth would give him a son. We have to acknowledge that Luke carried out very thorough research, easily verifiable by his readers.

We therefore know that Zechariah belonged to the division of Abijah (Abia), the eighth in the organization established by King David 1 Chronicles 24.1-19.

The order of these divisions is well established and there was no reason to change it. Ezra even took care to restore it after the return from the captivity Ezra 6.18.

We would like to emphasize the following fact:

This rule of the law of Moses does not, in our view, affect the order of the divisions of the priests set by David. It simply appears that the Levites who are not on duty come as reinforcements to the temple during these 3 feasts. The surplus of priests at that time proves very useful because of the considerable crowd of pilgrims.

We stated that the information from Daniel 9.24 and Luke 3.23 led us to set a date for the birth of Jesus: October 12, 2 BC.

The angel Gabriel informs us that when Mary becomes pregnant, Elizabeth is in her 6th month. There are therefore 6 months between the two births.

We are 6 months earlier than October 12, 2 BC, that is, April 12, 2 BC.

When the temple was destroyed by General Titus, on 9 Av 3830, that is, August 4, AD 70, it was the division of Jehoiarib, the first in David’s order, that was on duty. History, that of the world, has preserved this memory!

The division of Abijah is the eighth. We have 24 divisions that follow one another regularly. It is therefore possible to go back in time to see, at a precise date, which division was on duty.

We skip the calculations and arrive at the following result: Zechariah finishes his service on July 5, 3 BC.

If Elizabeth becomes pregnant soon after Zechariah’s return, with a gestation of 40 weeks we do arrive at early April. This shows us that the date of April 12, 2 BC agrees with Zechariah’s service.

We can date the birth of John to April 2 BC, six months before Jesus on October 12, 2 BC. Of course this demonstration does not constitute absolute proof but merely a confirmation, all the more so since Zechariah’s service was twice a year.

The birth of Jesus at the feast of Tabernacles on October 12, 2 BC, entailing the birth of John the Baptist around April 12, six months earlier, proves entirely realistic.

Many contemporary researchers and historians question the date of Jesus’ birth in 2 BC. This uncertainty is due in particular to the writings of the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who, at the end of the first century, provided information on King Herod the Great, suggesting a possible death in 4 BC.

However, the writings of Flavius Josephus are not necessarily in contradiction with the Gospels. Indeed, according to his account, the death of Herod the Great could also be dated to 1 BC. We explored this possibility in the appendix ANN011: The death of King Herod the Great. This divergence in the dates proposed for Herod’s death has a direct influence on the hypotheses concerning the birth of Jesus, which explains the different existing interpretations.

It is crucial to recognize that pushing back the birth of Jesus by two or three years calls into question not only the historical aspect but also the accuracy of the writings of Daniel and Luke. However, it must be admitted that the interpretation of historical sources can be influenced by personal and cultural convictions.

In studying the Gospels, we observe that the key events in the life of Jesus the Messiah often coincide with Jewish feasts. This correlation between the origins of these ceremonies and the events of his life is surprising.

The death of the Master, which we have placed on April 1, AD 33, coincides with the celebration of the Jewish Passover. This similarity is symbolic: just as the Passover lamb is sacrificed, the death of Jesus is interpreted as a sacrifice.

His birth, which we place on October 12, 2 BC, corresponds to the feast of Tabernacles. This feast celebrates the presence and blessing of God among his people, which can be seen as symbolic of the coming of the Son of God into the world.

His baptism, dated October 4, AD 29 according to us, marks the beginning of his ministry. This moment would symbolically correspond to the feast of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement.

For more information, please consult the appendix ANN043: The life of Jesus the Messiah and the Jewish feasts.

These observations suggest that the major events in the life of Jesus could be interpreted as giving new meaning to these traditional feasts. Although the original meaning of these celebrations remains unchanged, they seem to acquire an additional dimension, as if they marked the entry into a new era.

We wish to draw your attention to a verse in the book of John that has been interpreted by some to place the death of Jesus the Messiah around his 50th year.

In John 8.57-58, the Jews say to Jesus: “You are not yet 50 years old, and you have seen Abraham!” To this, Jesus replies: “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”

The age of 50 mentioned here is not chosen at random. In the context of the temple, it corresponds to retirement age, as Numbers 8.25-26 specifies: “From the age of fifty he shall retire from service and shall serve no more…”

However, this mention of 50 years by the Pharisees — show definition INF002 in the dialogue with Jesus must not be taken literally as an indication of his age. It is rather a way of stressing the impossibility, as perceived by the Pharisees — show definition INF002, that Jesus could have seen Abraham. Thus, it is incorrect to rely on this verse to deduce the actual age of Jesus the Messiah. This interpretation is, moreover, contradicted by Luke, who indicates that he was in his 34th year at the crucifixion.

The account of Luke 3.1-2 precisely locates the beginning of John the Baptist’s ministry:
“In the fifteenth year of the reign of Emperor Tiberius… the word of God came to John, son of Zechariah, in the wilderness.”
Luke provides here an exceptionally detailed historical landmark, mentioning at once the Roman and Jewish authorities in place.

In this study, we will examine this additional information given by Luke, which seems — in appearance only — to contradict certain elements reported by Matthew. These questions arise from the fact that the authors of the Gospels did not see fit to provide exhaustive historical landmarks. Moreover, secular history has not always preserved traces of events that nonetheless shook the world.

Our aim is therefore not to fix the chronology of the facts definitively, but to show that a coherent and plausible solution exists, without altering the limited data we have.
The absence of historical trace is never proof of the absence of an event.

1. The census of Quirinius

Concerning the census mentioned by Luke (Luke 2.1-2), we will not return here to the demonstrations presented in the appendix ANN009: The censuses of Quirinius.

Luke clearly mentions two censuses, which makes his testimony historically credible. This precision opens the possibility of a birth of Jesus in 2 BC, consistent with the Gospel data.

For the question of the death of Herod the Great, we refer to the appendix ANN011: The death of King Herod the Great.

If the year 4 BC remains plausible, the year 1 BC remains just as defensible.

These two dates have different implications, but neither decisively contradicts the Gospels (Matthew 2.1-20).

The current state of our knowledge does not allow a definitive decision.

3. The reign of Tiberius and the dating of John’s ministry

Luke gives us a historical landmark of great precision: the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius.

Tiberius was officially proclaimed emperor in AD 14.

The fifteenth year therefore corresponds to AD 28/29, depending on the way years are counted.

However, Luke seems to take into account the co-regency of Tiberius, established by Augustus:

• in AD 12, Tiberius receives the Imperium Majus, supreme authority over the provinces;
• in AD 13, he receives tribunician power for life.

In the provinces, Tiberius was therefore regarded as sovereign from the year 12.

Counting by this method, the fifteenth year corresponds to AD 26, which agrees perfectly with the prophetic chronology of Daniel 9.24-27.

• Chronological consequences:
• Start of John’s ministry: March/April AD 26
• Baptism of Jesus: October AD 29, that is, 3.5 years later, in the middle of the last prophetic week
• Death of the Messiah: April 3, AD 33, at the end of the 70 weeks
• Length of Jesus’ ministry: 3.5 years, in line with Revelation 11.3 (1,260 days)

This internal coherence shows that Luke made no mistake: he simply uses a different method of calculation, but one that is historically attested.

4. The other figures cited by Luke

Luke mentions several political and religious leaders, whose simultaneous presence constitutes a verifiable historical landmark:

• Pontius Pilate, governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36
• Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee from 4 BC to AD 39
• Philip, tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis from 1 BC (or 4 BC) to AD 34
• Lysanias, tetrarch of Abilene (poorly documented, but no known contradiction)
• Annas (high priest from AD 6 to 15) and Caiaphas (high priest from AD 18 to 36)
  • Annas was no longer in office, but retained an honorary title recognized by the people (John 18.13)

All these figures were indeed in office in the year 26, which confirms the reliability of Luke’s testimony.

The slightest error would have discredited his account among his contemporaries, which was never the case.

Conclusion

The careful examination of Luke’s data, confronted with Daniel’s prophecies and known historical landmarks, shows that:

• Luke’s chronology is precise,
• it is compatible with Matthew,
• it agrees with the prophetic structure of Daniel 9.24-27,
• it makes it possible to place the birth of Jesus in October 2 BC,
• and it confirms the internal coherence of the Gospels.