B.C. 4; secondly, that the taxing or census, including the oath to be faithful to Cæsar, mentioned by St. Luke, is that referred to by Josephus, and must have occurred also about two years prior to the death of Herod; thirdly, that the Slaughter of the Infants, recorded by St. Matthew, must be the same as that mentioned by Josephus, which took place at the time of imposing the oath; fourthly, the remarkable conjunction of the planets Saturn and Jupiter, which took place thrice on that year, and which may be the star which appeared to the wise men as they journeyed to Jerusalem and Bethlehem; and lastly, that the temple of Janus, so rarely shut on account of the incessant wars of the Romans, happened so to be at that very time, the conclusion appears to be irresistible that the birth of Christ took place towards the close of the year A.U.C. 747, B.C. 7.*

The learned Abbot Sanclemente in his treatise, "De Æra Vulgari," assigns the Census made by Quirinus, and the Nativity of Christ to the year A.U.C. 747, B.C. 7; and he gives the following fragment of an ancient inscription in favour of the above supposition:

.... Gem. Qva. Radacta. in. Po......

...vgvsti. Populique. Romani. Senat.... Supplicationes. Binas. ob. Res. Prosp.... Ipsi. Ornamenta. Triumph....

Proconsul, Asiam. Provinciam. Om....

Divi Avgvsti. Iterum. Syriam. Et. Ph......

"Enough of this fragment remains," says Sanclemente, "to prove that Quirinus is here meant. Of the Presidents of Syria under Augustus, two only obtained the ornaments of triumph, viz., Saturninus and Quirinus; and of these, only the latter, on the grounds alleged in the above inscription. Saturninus, then, cannot be the person spoken of, as there is nothing to show that he was Augustus' legate in Syria a second time, as the person was of whom the inscription here speaks." (See Browne's Ordo Sæclorum, p. 48, note, from which the above inscription is taken.)

CHAPTER IV.

THE TIME OF THE FIRST ADVENT.

"Jesus about thirty years of age"-"The fifteenth year of Tiberius Cæsar" -Two different modes of computing his reign-Tiberius' Proconsular Empire-Pontius Pilate, Governor of Judea-The High Priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas-The number of Passovers during Christ's ministry. HAVING thus considered at some length the year in which we are warranted in placing the nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, it may not be amiss, before proceeding to draw the proper conclusion for stating the crucifixion, to consider the most probable time of the year when this event occurred.

It is well known that according to the common ecclesiastical mode of reckoning, the birth of Christ is supposed to have happened on the 25th of December; but this, although possibly an early tradition, does not appear to have been adopted by the Roman Church, until after the time of the Council of Nice, in the beginning of the fourth century. It was adopted ten years later by the Greek Church, when it was separated from the Feast of the Epiphany, which used previously to be observed on the same day. The Church of Rome had, with its usual superstition, divided it into two, on the pretext that the second appearance of the star to the wise men, on their way to Bethlehem, was holier than the first. The introduction of this Romish custom, by Gregory the Theologian, into the Greek Church, caused great discontent at Constantinople, the people justly exclaiming, "You have divided the feast, and involved us in Polytheism." (See Hales' New Analysis of Chronology, vol. i., p. 196.) Clinton remarks, "For 300 years after the Ascension, no day was set apart for the commemoration of the birth of Christ. According to authorities quoted by Geiseler, Julius, Bishop of Rome, A.D. 337-52, first appointed December 25th for that purpose." (Fasti Romani vol. i., p. 238.) We see by this, that for the first three centuries, there does not appear to be any reason for thinking that

the early Christians observed it at the season which we are accustomed to do. Indeed, as far as we have any light from Scripture on the subject, we may reasonably infer that it must have occurred some time earlier in the year, than the close of the month of December. And although as the learned Scaliger observes, “To determine the true date of Christ's birth belongs to God alone," yet we are warranted in seeking to learn if anything, and if so, what the word of God teaches respecting such an interesting matter.

Of all the various conjectures that have been proposed, the most probable are either, first, that Christ was born about the time of the Vernal Equinox, when the Passover was celebrated, and when "Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us" (1 Cor. v. 7); or secondly, on the great day of Atonement, i.e., the 10th of the seventh month (Tizri, which answers nearly to our September), because Christ came to "make reconciliation (i.e., atonement) for the sins of the people" (Heb. ii. 17); or, thirdly, about the time of the autumnal Equinox, at the Feast of the Tabernacles, which was the 15th day of the 7th month, when Christ is said to have been "made flesh, and dwelt (i.e., tabernacled, okývoσev) among us." (John i. 14.) Of these three opinions, the last two seem the most probable, as they both occurred on the same month, and the autumnal season appears a more likely time than either the winter or the spring, when the Passover was kept. For, first, the depth of winter is not a very suitable season for making an assessment or census, such as was made when Christ was born, when the people were required to enter themselves according to their tribes or families, whereas the autumn, when the harvest is over, is a time when such a work was more likely to be attempted. Secondly, it is said by St. Luke, that at the time of Christ's birth, "there were in the same country, shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flocks by night." (ch. ii. 8.) Though in some very mild climates (which Judea is not in winter) sheep may be out at night in the month of December, it is not likely they should be so in those countries which must be attended by shepherds; which circumstance, as Lardner remarks, "is not very favourable to the supposition that Jesus was born the 25th of December, and we are at liberty to place it in autumn, a more likely season." (Vol. i. p. 370.)

But there are stronger grounds from Scripture than mere conjecture, with respect to the time of year when the nativity took place. e.g., We learn from 1 Chron. xxiv., that David

divided the Temple service for the priests into twenty-four courses during the year, and that the eighth course fell to Abijah. (v. 10.) As the Jewish ecclesiastical year commenced with the new moon of the month Nisan, which, on the year A.U.C. 747, B.C. 7, fell on the 12th of March, o.s., the eighth course would occur at the beginning of the month of July, according to our reckoning. We read in St. Luke (ch. i.) that “ as a certain priest, named Zacharias, of the course of Abia" (i.e., Abijah), the father of John the Baptist, was executing the priest's office before God in the order of his course" (i.e., in the month of July), an angel of the Lord appeared unto him, and announced that he should have a son. "And it came to pass, that, as soon as the days of his ministration were accomplished, he departed to his own house. And after those days his wife Elizabeth conceived, and hid herself five months, saying, Thus hath the Lord dealt with me, in the days wherein he looked upon me, to take away my reproach among men." And in the sixth month (which would be December, where the birth of Christ is now placed), the angel Gabriel was sent from God, unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to announce to the Virgin Mary, of the house of David, that she was "blessed among women," and should be the mother of the promised Messiah. Counting onwards nine months from this time, we arrive at the month of September, during which, both the Day of Atonement and the Feast of Tabernacles, as we have already seen, were observed, and when, as it appears strongly probable, the Lord of Glory was born, as it is said "the Lord was made flesh and tabernacled amongst us."*

Having thus seen the nature of the grounds on which our conclusions rest for dating the birth of the promised Messiah in the autumn of the year A.U.c. 747, B.C. 7, we pass on to consider how far it affords us aid in seeking to discover the time when he was cut off, according to the announcement of the prophet Daniel.

L. From the words of St. Luke, we learn that "Jesus began to be about thirty years of age, in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, while Pontius Pilate was Governor of Judea,

For a full consideration of the argument, see in "The Phenix, or, a Revival of Scarce and Valuable Pieces from the Remotest Antiquity down to the Present Times," a collection of printed tracts, one entitled, "Christ's Birth Mis-timed, proving that Christ was not born in December." By R. S.

London: 1707.

and Annas and Caiaphas were the High Priests" (Luke i. and i. 23), when he received baptism at the hands of John the Baptist and when his public ministry commenced. By this statement of the Evangelist, we gather that the fifteenth year of Tiberius accords with the time when Jesus was about thirty years of age, (the expression "began to be about," being, as Alford remarks, in loco, ungrammatical). The word "about" wore, admits of considerable latitude, though only in one direction, viz., over thirty years of age, which we know from its threefold repetition in the book of Numbers, a Levite was required to be before he could enter upon "the work in the tabernacle of the congregation." (Num. iv. 3, 23, 47.)

The same word is frequently used in Scripture in a similar manner, showing that a precise exactness is not intended. e.g., It is said, Matt. xiv. 21, "They that had eaten were about 5000, besides women and children." (John i. 39.) "It was about the tenth hour." (Acts v. 36.) "To whom (Theudas) a number of men about 400, joined themselves." Hence Kepler remarks that "round and decimal numbers may be used with great latitude; and that a person may be truly said to be about thirty years of age, if he be above twenty-five and under thirty-five; but that if a person be said to be about twenty-eight, or about thirty-two years of age, it is to be supposed, he is exactly so old, or not above a month or two more or less." (De Anno C. Natali c. 12.) And so Lardner says, "Many examples of this use of round numbers may be found in the best writers, even without the particle wore about, which of itself seems to be a hint that the writer does intend to be understood with some latitude." (Credib: of G. H. 1. ii. 3.) Therefore, we may safely assume that this expression of St. Luke does not mean, as some would have it, that Jesus was entering upon his thirtieth year, but that he was upwards of thirty-it might be two or three years more than that.

Supposing that Jesus was born in September, A.u.c. 747, b.c. 7, and was "about thirty years of age," in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, we must consider how we are to date that fifteenth year. It is admitted on all hands, that Augustus Cæsar died at Nola, in Campania, and was succeedod by Tiberius, on the 19th of August, A.U.C. 767, A.D. 14.* Reckoning onwards from this

See Tacitus Ann. 1. i. 5.