When was “The First Resurrection”?

At the end of what we call the Old Covenant, the long history of sacrificial “ascensions” also came to an end. Along with this, all the Old Covenant saints ascended to heaven in what the Revelation calls “the first resurrection.” However, it seems to me that the sacrificial rites themselves indicate that the saints did not ascend in AD70 but instead just prior to the beginning of the Roman siege.

The sacrificial rites which found their fulfilment in first century events divide the seven year process into two parts: the tribulation of the saints and then the “days of vengeance” upon the sinners. Thus, the Jewish War was not the Great Tribulation, since the Jews were the primary persecutors. The Roman siege was the final judgment upon Jerusalem and Jewry for a generation of persecution.

Two Goats

The period from the tearing of the Temple veil to the destruction of the entire Temple was a great “ascension” offering (Leviticus 1), with Christ ascending as the clean Head of the sacrifice, being taken up into the glory cloud, and returning a generation later “in like manner” (Acts 1:11) and “in clouds” for the washed Body. This “heavenly” offering is recapitulated in a national “earthly” sense in the Day of Atonement, where the High Priest made two approaches to the Most Holy, the first for the priesthood, and the second for the people.¹See James Jordan’s brilliant exposition of this pattern providing the structure and meaning of Daniel 7 in his Daniel commentary. It is the Day of Atonement rite which helps us to understand the events surround the destruction of the earthly House of God.

The history of “The Circumcision” follows the pattern found in microcosm in Israel’s annual festal calendar, at the end of which was the Feast of Booths, a great blessing for all nations from a purified Israel. Before this feast (and the promise made to Abraham concerning the blessing for all nations) could be fulfilled, animal sacrifices had to come to an end. Animals represented Adam and Eve and their offspring, as “blameless” people. Since believers were now indeed blameless before God, with the apostolic church offering itself as a willing sacrifice,²See Feed My Lambs the sins would be carried by those who had trodden underfoot the blood of Christ. They would carry the sins of the people as the cursed goat carried the burden into the wilderness. Unbelieving Judah would be expelled from the Covenant in the way Judas was exiled from the table of Christ.

Applying this to first century history, we see that the murdered saints ascended to heaven as the first goat when the persecutions ended and the siege began. After this, all the sins were laid upon the earthly Jerusalem as the second goat, and Israel according to the flesh was driven to destruction.

Avenging Abel

The final “week” of seven years follows the sacrificial pattern set by Christ’s three year ministry the initial apostolic testimony to the Jews, a period which corresponds to Paul’s time of training in the wilderness at Sinai. However it was now the blood of the Christians being spilled in the great city at the end of three years of Jewish jubilation, and the second half of this repeated week would see Zion itself turned into Sinai, a burning mountain cast down into the wild sea of the nations (Revelation 8:8).

As it was with the blood of Abel, the murderous “oblation” in the midst of the week would be a legal witness calling down judgment from heaven upon the ground, in this case the “Land” of Israel. So it was the final martyrdoms in Jerusalem—most likely Christians being murdered as scapegoats, as those who “troubled Israel” like Elijah (1 Kings 18:17) and “tormented those who dwell upon the Land” (Revelation 11:10)—which brought an end to the 3½ year tribulation of the saints, and began the Roman siege. It could then be the saints in heaven (from both the Old and New Covenants, as two legal witnesses) calling down the Mosaic curses upon the city for the second half of the week. They could do this because the Jewish Christians had either been murdered (Revelation refers to them as “two legal witnesses”) or fled to the nearby city of Pella.³See Pella: A Window On Survival by Mark Wilson. Like Sodom, there was no one righteous left in her.

“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.” (Luke 21:20-22)

Thus, the pattern of the final seven years—the Great Tribulation—is the final “sacrifice for sin,” and it is the entire “holy city” whose smoke would go up as a memorial.⁴This is the context of Hebrews 10:26: “For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins…” The entire four-cornered Land became a bloody Altar of Bronze.⁵One commenter on Sin City – 2 noted that Gentry could be correct in his assertion that the Revelation concerned only this final “week.” Although it does follow the same pattern, this final week is described only in the “Seven Bowls” section of the book. This means that Gentry interprets the details of the book incorrectly.

The Final Week

The fact that the final seven years of Jewish history follows the pattern laid down in Genesis 1 reveals it to be a “de-Creation.” The Temple had represented the entire cosmos,⁶See James Jordan, The First Ascension. but that role was now fulfilled in the Body of Christ.

So it makes sense that the saints suffered and ascended (as the “first goat”, the first resurrection) for 3 years before the second goat, the unrepentant Jews, became the second goat, “the second death.” (Although, the deaths of the final witnesses and the flight of the remaining saints to Pella was also a twofold event, a sacrificial “binding and loosing” on Moriah.)

Indeed, the language used by Jesus concerning the final Feast of Ingathering (another name for Booths) employs “Day 4″ symbols:

“Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the [Land] will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” (Matthew 24:29-31)

The ascension of the elect of all the previous ages—including Abel and Abraham, and the apostolic martyrs—to reign with Christ is what allowed Him to pour out a “harvest” of destruction upon the Jerusalem below.

And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. (Revelation 11:8).

We cannot understand the Revelation rightly, or indeed the New Testament, without having the praxemes of the Torah either on our tongues or close at hand, but more importantly in our hearts. Otherwise we will fulfill them just as the Jews did. But the Church will never suffer again in the way it did before the end of Jerusalem (Matthew 24:21), a firstfruits Church which like her Master was offered up for the life of the world (Colossians 1:24).

The Folks of Nazareth: Bi-Polar or Nah?

by Daniel Hoffmann

Jesus’ first recorded public engagement in the Gospel of Luke comes in 4:16-29, where he speaks in the synagogue of Nazareth, his hometown. Go ahead and read it; I’ll wait. If you read the account in the English Standard Version, it sounds as the though the people of the synagogue do a complete 180° in their attitude toward Jesus: from hearing him enthusiastically, to wanting to kill him. Is that what really happened?

After the first bit of his sermon, they all “spoke well of him and marveled at the gracious words that were coming out of his mouth” (v. 22, per ESV), but less than ten verses later, they’re making a concerted effort to toss him down the cliff (v. 29). The NASB and NKJV give us this same sense, and it’s owing entirely to the way verse 22 is translated. The translators may have this wrong. So, while realizing that it’s probably unwise to call out three highly regarded, conservative, and literal translations for being misleading, I want to register an objection.

I don’t think verse 22 has the people of Nazareth receiving Jesus well, only to flip right into a murderous rage. I think they were negative toward Jesus from the beginning. I have two reasons:

1) The Greek language of 4:22 is sufficiently ambiguous to allow a more negative interpretation.

2) The context seems to demand the negative interpretation.

First, what’s the Greek Say?

The Greek term behind “spoke well of” is the single Greek verb martyreo (ἐμαρτύρουν), which has as its basic meaning “to testify” or “bear witness to.” What is being testified to is determined by the context. The word does not mean “to speak well of,” even though many times when it’s being used, what is being testified to is someone’s good character (e.g., Cornelius, Acts 10:22; David, Acts 13:22). So the question in Luke 4:22 is, to what are the people testifying? It would appear to be the fact that they knew Jesus’ background and who he was — “Is this not Joseph’s son?” It’s a question asked also in Matthew 13:55, and there it does not appear to be a compliment.

Moreover, “gracious words” is more literally “words of grace.” The people of Nazareth were not marveling at Jesus gracious words, as though he was such a nice guy or eloquent speaker. They were marveling at the words of grace—the announcement he had just made in vs. 18-21 that the year of the Lord’s favor was upon them.¹One heavy-weight commentator on Luke, Darrell Bock, notes that “testify” may have the sense of “testify against,” in agreement with what I’m proposing here, but dismisses the possibility on the grounds that “gracious words” seems to be a positive statement. That objection is unpersuasive if we recognize that “words of grace” is not speaking of the character of Jesus’ words, but the content of his words, which is v.21, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”

So putting these things together, what we have is this: Jesus reads the prophecy of Isaiah about the year of the Lord’s favor, puts the scroll down, and says the words are fulfilled “this day in your hearing”.

The people testify – while marveling at this word of grace – that this guy speaking to them is someone they know. It’s just Jesus, the carpenter’s son! How could he be the fulfillment of God’s exalted promises from centuries ago? Jesus claims to be the fulfillment of God’s promises, but the people, “with their eyes fixed on him,” don’t see it that way.

Second, this fits the context

This understanding makes better sense to me contextually because it does not demand that the townspeople have a sudden mood swing. They are feeling suspicious and negative of Jesus from the beginning. That’s why, when they “testify”, Jesus immediately starts rebuking them, about how no prophet (himself) is welcome in his hometown. They weren’t speaking well of him, they were mocking his pedigree—or in their minds, his lack of one.

How about it, translation committees?

Daniel Hoffmann is a Bible and history teacher at Cherokee Christian School in Woodstock, Georgia. Reposted with permission.

Jesus would be gathered first to the true fathers, then, once enthroned, He would gather the true sons.

In English, the word manger is archaic, preserved for us by the Christmas tradition. In French, the word is still in use, being the infinitive “to eat.” As with every detail in the Scriptures, the fact that the One who would give Himself to us in the elements of a meal was placed in a food trough invites contemplation.

This post has been slain and resurrected for inclusion in my 2015 book of essays, Inquietude.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

Peter Leithart has posted a response from Joe Rigney concerning the meaning of Luke 12-13. We had a look at the structure of these chapters here recently (See 666 in the Gospel of Luke), so I thought it would be interesting to see how these two approaches “speak to each other.”

Joe writes:

In 12:49-53, Jesus says that he’s come to cast fire on the earth and divide families. He goes on to make a point about his audience’s ability to discern weather: they recognize rain in the first clouds, and they recognize scorching heat in the first breeze from the south. The common point is that we recognize major weather events in their small precursors. We can see storms in seed form. The hypocrisy of the Jews was their unwillingness to apply this basic principle to judgments: They knew how to interpret the appearance of earth and sky, but not the present time (12:56). They had not learned the lesson of Amos 4:6-13: the famine, drought, blight, pestilence, and raids are simply the warm-up, the warning of what is to come if the people don’t repent. Failure to interpret the events and heed the warning will lead to the ultimate judgment: Prepare to meet your God.

Following this point through in Ch. 13, Jesus is telling them that the fall of the tower and the mixing of the blood is a precursor to a greater calamity for the whole nation. Pilate’s mingling of the blood is the cloud; the falling of the tower is the south wind. The desecration and destruction of AD 66-70 is the storm and the scorching heat. They’re drawing conclusions about the individuals involved instead of realizing that such calamities are a message to them, a merciful warning from God.

In this light, the intervening verses in 12:57-59 make sense. Israel is the accused on the way to the magistrate; judgment is coming. Now is the time to settle with the accuser, to make things right. Otherwise, you will pass through the full range of the court system: accuser, judge, and officer, and find yourself in prison until you can pay.

Thus, there’s a tight unity to Jesus’ entire discourse at this point, and one that ought to be instructive for us as we try to learn what it means to interpret the present time.

This is an important observation. It means that the “eternal” message behind Jesus’ words is secondary. This was not a threat that would be carried out at the end of history, but in the near future, the “soon” of Revelation 1:1-3.

Tying this to the Covenant-literary structure, we see the fall of the tower at Ascension as not only a great irony, but also a “promise.” Firstfruits is the “taste” of Pentecost, but it is also the promise of a greater harvest, a more mature on of grapes and olives, at Tabernacles. And what do we find at that point in the structure? Jesus weeping over not just the fall of a single tower (Covenant Head) but the entire Old Covenant Body, the city.

On the positive side, the Ascension of the true Firstfruits, Jesus, was also a sign of the coming rise of a New Covenant Body, pictured in the healing of the Woman who was bent over. The “uprightness” of Jesus as Head would be accounted to the Church through faith.

This “division” between the believers and unbelievers gives us the “plunder and plagues” at Maturity, the true Jews and the false Jews.

Now, does the historical fulfillment negate the use of Jesus’ warning today? Not at all. It demonstrates that God does work in history and that His judgment are just. Modern conservatives continue to overlook the first century significance of most of the New Testament, and keep peddling “application” as if it is interpretation. Consequently, the words of Jesus seem to have no power. They float somewhere in the sky, and will be irrelevant until the final judgment. This is a sad state of affairs. The fact that Jesus’ words came to pass in the Land means they will come to pass in the World. Joe’s final line is the best kind of application.

“So, perhaps the best conclusion is that John was not looking for encouragement, but giving encouragement. In effect, he was saying, ‘Get on with it, cousin!’”

The nature of the texts of the Bible is just like the spoken words God gave to Adam. A great deal remained unsaid, and Adam was to “read between the lines” based upon God’s revealed character as his Father. However, Adam let somebody else fill in the gaps with some conflicting information about God’s character, somebody who was very likely jealous of Adam’s commission and had an ax to grind (and even here, we are left to fill in the gaps as to Satan’s motive based upon later scriptures!)

The record of John the Baptist’s question to Jesus similarly doesn’t give us all the information. All the texts are written to make us think very hard and very deeply, and to call to mind things we have read in previous texts. Some Christian writers fill in the gaps concerning the reason for John’s question with a view to helping Christians who experience doubt (here’s an example). There are certainly other texts that speak of doubt which could indicate that this was what John was experiencing.

And Jesus said to him, “ ‘If you can’! All things are possible for one who believes.” Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, “I believe; help my unbelief!” (Mark 9:23-24)

But is this what is really going on here? Or is this interpretation one that shows both our ignorance of the Old Testament and of the Bible’s fundamental “Covenant” structure? What if the question asked by John had nothing to do with doubt, but simply his expectations of Jesus based on the roles in the Triune Office? (See The Triune Office.)

Unlike Adam, John would have had no doubts about Jesus’ Divine character. James Jordan observes that John would have seen his cousin at least three times every year at the regular feasts, which John would still have been required to attend even after he moved into the wilderness as an adult to begin his ministry.

John knew that Jesus was the Great Priest because he referred to Him as the lamb of God, who had come to take away the sins of the world. John also knew that Jesus was the Great King because he had then seen Him anointed directly by the Father (in the Old Testament, the prophets who anointed kings were often referred to as “father.” Likewise, Joseph is referred to by Pharaoh as “father.” See Peter Leithart’s book on 1 and 2 Samuel, A Son To Me.) James Jordan suggests that John’s question was about Jesus being the Great Prophet (Deuteronomy 18:15), the one about whom the priests and Levites had questioned John himself (John 1:21). Priests do not do miracles. Neither do kings. Only prophets do miracles, and John was simply wondering if the Triune Office would be fulfilled in a single Adam. Was Jesus doing the kinds of things that prophets like Elijah and Elisha did, things that John himself, as “Elijah,” never did?

And when the men had come to him, they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you, saying, ‘Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?’ ” In that hour he healed many people of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on many who were blind he bestowed sight. And he answered them, “Go and tell John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good news preached to them. And blessed is the one who is not offended by me.” (Luke 7:20-23)

This also makes sense of the final sentence concerning “offense.” Historically, the prophets were killed because the Covenant-legal message they brought was offensive to the Covenant breakers.

So, perhaps the best conclusion is that John was not looking for encouragement, but giving encouragement. In effect, he was saying, “Get on with it!”

Moving from deduction by logic to literary structure, do we see this conclusion supported in the shape of Luke’s text? I believe we do. (Thanks to Albert Garlando for his initial work on the structure of this passage.)

Covenant structure of Luke 7 – 8

The Falling Architecture of Luke 12:49 – 13:35

An online friend noticed that the tower of Siloam in Luke 13:4 killed eighteen people, and only a few paragraphs later, in 13:11, the bent-over woman had been disabled for eighteen years. Is this a coincidence? Not likely.

I think this repeated number is a clue to the literary structure of this part of Luke’s gospel. If we see a “double witness” like this, very often the identical points are indicators that we are near the centre of a symmetrical arrangement. If we see two flags on the beach, the lifeguard should be somewhere in the middle.

Tracing the subject matter both backwards and forwards from this centre seems to give the following outline, which is as grand as it is profound. It begins with a five-fold Covenant and ends with a seven-fold Creation. The Covenant scroll is opened by the worthy Lamb. The middle points all seem to be “three-level” houses, like the primeval world, the ark of Noah, the Tabernacle and the Temples. Eighteen is 6+6+6, that is, a triune failure in Garden (Adam), Land (Cain) and World (Sons of God). At Passover we have allusions to the sins of Adam and Cain, and at Atonement the Great Flood. The instances of eighteen appear at the Bronze Altar (earth) and at the Incense Altar (heaven), with Israel as the mediator between them as the light of the Lampstand obscured by unfaithfulness, or, in Old Testament terms, harlotry.

SABBATH – Rest disturbed
No Peace on the Land – De-Creation/Ark

PASSOVER – End of the Old Creation
Not Peace But Division – Division/Veil
3 – World (family divided – Noah and family)
2 – Land (harvest times – Cain and Abel)
1 – Garden (theft and the accuser – Adam)

FIRSTFRUITS – Bloodied House
Repent or Perish – Ascension/Altar+Table
Pilate’s human sacrifices (un-Altar)
6+6+6 men slain by falling tower (un-ascension)
Adam dies for all three domains.

PENTECOST – Hearts Revealed
The Barren Fig Tree – Testing/Lampstand
3 years – Pentecost to Holocaust – Spirit

TRUMPETS – Resurrected House
The Upright Woman – Maturity/Incense Altar
6+6+6 woman in bondage – Eve rises and enters into rest

ATONEMENT – Days of Noah – Beginning of the New Creation
High Priest and Mediating Animals
1 – The Mustard Seed in the Garden (Adam shelters Eve: Priest)
2 – The Leaven in the Land (Eve brings forth righteous sons: Priest and King)
3 – The Narrow Door (Righteous sons safe behind the door: Priest, King and Prophet)

BOOTHS – INGATHERING – Rest Removed
The lament over Jerusalem – the Tabernacle destroyed

This last stanza seems to work through the Ten Words. Also, the reference to Herod as a fox might be because the Idumeans (Edomites) were descendants of Esau. He was thus red, hairy, unclean, and a conniving predator.

AERIAL VIEW

If that’s all too much, here’s how this passage represents the entire story of Christ and the Church in the first century:

Breathtaking! It would be interesting to see where this structure fits in the shape of the entire Gospel.

___________________________________
[1] This Herod is the Tetrarch under whom John the Baptist was martyred.
[2] The placement of the falling tower ties this passage to the tower of Babel, a false “ascension” to the heavens, and thus to the Herodian “Babylon” of the Revelation.
[3] See the chapter on the sacrificial meaning of “binding and loosing” in God’s Kitchen.

“That which they sought to save them from the condemnation of the Law of Moses has also innoculated them against the grace and Spirit of Jesus Christ.”

Pope Francis, in a recent homily, has written,

[This post has been refined and included in Sweet Counsel: Essays to Brighten the Eyes.]

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

Here’s some interesting calculations concerning the day of Jesus’ birth in relation to Israel’s festal calendar. It was written by Michael Scheifler (a Seventh-day Adventist), and is reproduced here with his permission.

While much of the world celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ on the 25th of December, can the actual day of Jesus’ birth be determined from scripture? This question will be explored in some detail, and will yield a result that is quite intriguing. The first passage we will consider begins with the father of John the Baptist, Zacharias:

There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth… And it came to pass, that while he executed the priest’s office before God in the order of his course, … 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 Elisabeth conceived, … (Luke 1:5, 8, 23-24)

The clue given to us here is that Zacharias was of the “course” of Abia.

The 24 Courses of the Temple Priesthood

7. But David, being desirous of ordaining his son king of all the people, called together their rulers to Jerusalem, with the priests and the Levites; and having first numbered the Levites, he found them to be thirty-eight thousand, from thirty years old to fifty; out of which he appointed twenty-three thousand to take care of the building of the temple, and out of the same, six thousand to be judges of the people and scribes, four thousand for porters to the house of God, and as many for singers, to sing to the instruments which David had prepared, as we have said already. He divided them also into courses: and when he had separated the priests from them, he found of these priests twenty-four courses, sixteen of the house of Eleazar, and eight of that of Ithamar; and he ordained that one course should minister to God eight days, from sabbath to sabbath. And thus were the courses distributed by lot, in the presence of David, and Zadok and Abiathar the high priests, and of all the rulers; and that course which came up first was written down as the first, and accordingly the second, and so on to the twenty-fourth; and this partition hath remained to this day. — Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book 7, Chapter 14, Paragraph 7.

King David, on God’s instructions (1 Chr 28:11-13), had divided the sons of Aaron into 24 groups (1 Chr 24:1-4), to setup a schedule by which the Temple of the Lord could be staffed with priests all year round in an orderly manner. After the 24 groups of priests were established, lots were drawn to determine the sequence in which each group would serve in the Temple. (1 Chr 24: 7-19). That sequence is as follows:

These were the orderings of them in their service to come into the house of the LORD, according to their manner, under Aaron their father, as the LORD God of Israel had commanded him. (1 Chr 24:19)

Now each one of the 24 “courses” of priests would begin and end their service in the Temple on the Sabbath, a tour of duty being for one week (2 Chr 23:8, 1 Chr 9:25). On three occasions during the year, all the men of Israel were required to travel to Jerusalem for festivals of the Lord, so on those occasions all the priests would be needed in the Temple to accommodate the crowds. Those three festivals were Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, and Tabernacles (Deut 16:16).

The Yearly Cycle of Service in the Temple

The Jewish calendar begins in the spring, during the month of Nisan, so the first “course” of priests, would be that of the family of Jehoiarib, who would serve for one week, Sabbath to Sabbath. The second week would then be the responsibility of the family of Jedaiah. The third week would be the feast of Unleavened Bread, and all priests would be present for service. Then the schedule would resume with the third course of priests, the family of Harim. By this plan, when the 24th course was completed, the general cycle of courses would repeat. This schedule would cover 51 weeks or 357 days, enough for the lunar Jewish calendar (about 354 days). So, in a period of a year, each group of priests would serve in the Temple twice on their scheduled course, in addition to the 3 major festivals, for a total of about five weeks of duty.

The Conception of John the Baptist

Now back to Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist.

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 Elisabeth conceived, … (Luke 1:23-24)

Beginning with the first month, Nisan, in the spring (March-April), the schedule of the priest’s courses would result with Zacharias serving during the 10th week of the year. This is because he was a member of the course of Abia (Abijah), the 8th course, and both the Feast of Unleavened Bread (15-21 Nisan) and Pentecost (6 Sivan) would have occurred before his scheduled duty. This places Zacharias’ administration in the Temple as beginning on the second Sabbath of the third month, Sivan (May-June).

Having completed his Temple service on the third Sabbath of Sivan, Zacharias returned home and soon conceived his son John. So John the Baptist was probably conceived shortly after the third Sabbath of the month of Sivan.

The Conception of Jesus Christ.

Now the reason that the information about John is important, is because according to Luke, Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the sixth month of Elisabeth’s pregnancy:

And after those days his wife Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself five months, saying, “Thus hath the Lord dealt with me in the days wherein he looked on me, to take away my reproach among men.” And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. (Luke 1:24-27)

Note that verse 26 above refers to the sixth month of Elisabeth’s pregnancy, not Elul, the sixth month of the Hebrew calendar, and this is made plain by the context of verse 24 and again in verse 36:

Luke 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. (Luke 1:36)

Mary stayed with Elizabeth for the last 3 months of her pregnancy, until the time that John was born.

And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned to her own house. Now Elisabeth’s full time came that she should be delivered; and she brought forth a son. (Luke 1:56-57)

Now working from the information about John’s conception late in the third month, Sivan, and advancing six months, we arrive late in the 9th month of Kislev (Nov-Dec) for the time frame for the conceptionof Jesus. It is notable here that the first day of the Jewish festival of Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights, is celebrated on the 25th day of Kislev, and Jesus is called the light of the world (John 8:12, 9:5, 12:46). This does not appear to be a mere coincidence. In the book of John, Hanukkah is called the feast of dedication (John 10:22). Hanukkah is an eight day festival of rejoicing, celebrating deliverance from enemies by the relighting of the menorah in the rededicated Temple, which according to the story, stayed lit miraculously for eight days on only one day’s supply of oil.

The Birth of John the Baptist

Based on a conception shortly after the third Sabbath of the month of Sivan, projecting forward an average term of about 10 lunar months (40 weeks), we arrive in the month of Nisan. It would appear that John the Baptist may have been born in the middle of the month, which would coincide with Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. It is interesting to note, that even today, it is customary for the Jews to set out a special goblet of wine during the Passover Seder meal, in anticipation of the arrival of Elijah that week, which is based on the prophecy of Malachi:

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD… (Malachi 4:5)

Jesus identified John as the “Elijah” that the Jews had expected:

And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist. (Matthew 17:10-13)

The angel that appeared to Zacharias in the temple also indicated that John would be the expected “Elias”:

And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. (Luke 1:17)

So then, the Feast of Unleavened Bread begins on the 15th day of the 1st month, Nisan, and this is a likely date for the birth of John the Baptist, the expected “Elijah”.

The Birth of Jesus Christ

Since Jesus was conceived six months after John the Baptist, and we have established a likely date for John’s birth, we need only move six months farther down the Jewish calendar to arrive at a likely date for the birth of Jesus. From the 15th day of the 1st month, Nisan, we go to the 15th day of the 7th month, Tishri. And what do we find on that date? It is the festival of Tabernacles! The 15th day of Tishri begins the third and last festival of the year to which all the men of Israel were to gather in Jerusalem for Temple services. (Lev 23:34)

Immanuel

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14)

Immanuel means “God with us”. The Son of God had come to dwell with, or tabernacle on earth with His people.

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

The Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot), occurs five days after the Day of Atonement, and is a festival of rejoicing and celebration of deliverance from slavery in Egypt (Leviticus 23:42-43).

And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn. And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. (Luke 2:7-11)

Why was there no room at the inn? Bethlehem is only about 5 miles from Jerusalem, and all the men of Israel had come to attend the festival of Tabernacles as required by the law of Moses. Every room for miles around Jerusalem would have been already taken by pilgrims, so all that Mary and Joseph could find for shelter was a stable. During Tabernacles, everyone was to live in temporary booths (Sukkot), as a memorial to Israel’s pilgrimage out of Egypt – Lev. 23:42-43. The birth of the Savior, in what amounted to a temporary dwelling rather than a house, signaled the coming deliverance of God’s people from slavery to sin, and their departing for the promised land, which is symbolized by Tabernacles.

Also of note is the fact that the Feast of Tabernacles is an eight day feast (Lev 23:36, 39). Why eight days? It may be because an infant was dedicated to God by performing circumcision on the eighth day after birth:

Luke 2:21 And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb. (Luke 2:21)

So the infant Jesus would have been circumcised on the eighth and last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, a Sabbath day. The Jews today consider this a separate festival from Tabernacles, and they call it Shemini Atzeret.

The Baptism of Jesus

There is another indication in scripture as to when Jesus was born.

Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. (Mark 1:14-15)

Jesus said this after His baptism, upon emerging from 40 days in the wilderness, when He began His preaching ministry. The book of Daniel gives us the “time” or prophesy Jesus was speaking about.

Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, … (Daniel 9:25-27)

It is very likely that by understanding this prophecy and date of the decree when it began, the wise men knew exactly when to look for the Christ child. The 70th week of Daniel, a period of 7 literal years, began with “Messiah the Prince”. Messiah means anointed, and Jesus was publicly anointed by the Holy Spirit at His baptism. Daniel 9:26-27 tells us that the Messiah would be “cut off” (crucified) in the “midst of the (70th) week”, which is to say the Messiah would be crucified 3 1/2 years after His baptism.

And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, … (Luke 3:22-23)

Luke hints that at His baptism Jesus became about thirty, so it was likely that His birthday coincided, more or less, with His baptism (A Levitical priest began his service at the age of 30, Numbers 4:3). So His baptism agrees with the time of Tabernacles, because 3 years and 6 months later at Passover, Jesus was crucified exactly and precisely as Daniel had prophesied, in the midst of the 70th week. Knowing the year of His baptism from understanding Daniel, the wise men needed only to subtract 30 from it to know the year the Messiah would
be born.

The Star of Bethlehem

“… in the Old Testament (Daniel 9) the Saviour’s advent was more clearly revealed. The magi learned with joy that His coming was near, and that the whole world was to be filled with a knowledge of the glory of the Lord. The wise men had seen a mysterious light in the heavens upon that night when the glory of God flooded the hills of Bethlehem. As the light faded, a luminous star appeared, and lingered in the sky. It was not a fixed star nor a planet, and the phenomenon excited the keenest interest. That star was a distant company of shining angels, but of this the wise men were ignorant. Yet they were impressed that the star was of special import to them. They consulted priests and philosophers, and searched the scrolls of the ancient records. The prophecy of Balaam had declared,

“There shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Scepter shall rise out of Israel.” Num. 24:17

Could this strange star have been sent as a harbinger of the Promised One? The magi had welcomed the light of heaven-sent truth; now it was shed upon them in brighter rays. Through dreams they were instructed to go in search of the newborn Prince.”

– The Desire of Ages, by E. G. White, pg. 60.

Conclusion

So, if you have followed the above reasoning, based on the scriptural evidence, a case can apparently be made that Jesus Christ was born on the 15th day of the month of Tishri, on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles, which corresponds to the September – October time frame of our present calendar!

Tabernacles Future Fulfillment

It is also interesting to note that Tabernacles was a feast of ingathering of the Harvest (Exodus 23:16 and 34:22). If Jesus’ first coming was indeed on 15 Tishri, the first day of Tabernacles, then it is quite reasonable to presume that the harvest of this earth, the ingathering of the second coming of Jesus Christ, will also occur on precisely the same date. The unknown factor would be the year that this would happen.

A guest post by Luke Welch.

I’ve been reading The Hobbit again, out loud, to our children, and this time through, one phrase in the first chapter caught my attention.

When Bilbo first encounters Gandalf as an adult, he exhales a list of memories of the greatness and fearful unpredictability of the old wizard:

Not the wandering wizard that gave Old Took a pair of magic diamond studs that fastened themselves and never came undone till ordered? Not the fellow who used to tell such wonderful tales at parties, about dragons and goblins and giants and the rescue of princesses and the unexpected luck of widows’ sons?  (The Hobbit, Chapter 1).

In the Bible, there are two widows who received their sons from the dead: the widow of Zarephath (1 Kings 17), and the widow of Nain (Luke 7). In both cases, a visit by a prophet results in the resurrection of the widow’s only son. In both cases, the miracle vindicates the prophet, resulting in a confession, a testimony, that the prophet is God’s man indeed.

A prophet
…..visits
……….the “displaced” widow
……….whose son dies or is dead;
……………The prophet performs a miracle
……….and raises the son to life;
……….which brings a testimony
…..of the vindication
of the prophet. [1]

The importance of the vindication of the prophet is often overlooked. Here are the announcements from both stories:

And Elijah took the child and brought him down from the upper chamber into the house and delivered him to his mother. And Elijah said, “See, your son lives.” And the woman said to Elijah, “Now I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the Lord in your mouth is truth.” (1 Kings 17:24)

And the dead man sat up and began to speak, and Jesus gave him to his mother. Fear seized them all, and they glorified God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” and “God has visited his people!” (Luke 7:15-16)

Resurrection is extraordinary, and therefore entirely unexpected. It is incredible except for those who have witnessed it first-hand. And when it does occur, it reveals that the prophet is under the power of the Spirit of God and confirms his God-given authority to speak for God to the people of God.

Of course, there is another historical resurrection which follows the same pattern.

Jesus was the “only Son” of a widow, Mary. It is likely that Joseph died before Jesus’ baptism. From the beginning of His ministry, at His first miracle (turning water into wine in John 4), Mary treats Jesus as the “man of the house.” While on the cross, Jesus delegates His Covenant responsibility to shelter Mary. He passes it to the next believing man of the family, His younger cousin John, son of Zebedee (John 19.26-27).

Then, her son, her only son, is killed by God (cf. 1 Kings 17:20, Isaiah 53:10).

And so Jesus is resurrected, and Mary receives back her dead.

That leaves us with a question. What does this say about the prophet? Elijah was known to be the Spirit’s mouth because of the resurrection he received through prayer. Jesus was known to be the Great Prophet rising up among the people, because he gave resurrection. But who resurrected Jesus?

It was the Holy Spirit himself (Romans 1:4). Of course, we hear from Paul later on that the resurrection of Jesus was a Trinitarian act (cf. Romans 8:11ff). But even there, the Power of the Holy Spirit is what is emphasized in this life-giving to dead sons.

So, in Mary’s receiving back her dead, we are justified in looking for a testimony, a vindication, of that Prophet. The next great prophetic voice was that of the Spirit in the testimony of Jesus. He was in the apostles, as eyewitnesses to the resurrection. They vindicated Jesus, and history continues to vindicate them. The Spirit is the jar of holy oil that never runs out.

_______________________________
[1] Mike Bull: I’ve expanded a little on Luke’s original outline here, to bring out the echo of the Ten Commandments: Word from God, alienation from the Land, mother and father, knife and fire, theft/gift and true witness, and finally, shelter and sheltered. Concerning the alienation from the Land, “The location of the miracle in Nain is also possibly an allusion to the raising of the Shunamite woman’s son by Elisha because Nain is only a couple of miles north of Shunem (cf. 2Ki 4:). So the event and location are both allusions to Elijah and Elisha.” [bible.org] The prophets ministered to those outside of Israel to provoke Israel to jealousy.

Jordan writes:

From ancient times it has been known that Matthew wrote first (despite all the nonsense of liberals during the last century). Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, in his out-of-print book The Fruit of Lips, presents some compelling arguments to show that each of the gospel writers was adding to the previous writer, and in fact that each gospel picks up where the preceding one left off in terms of theme.

Matthew presents Christ as Ox/Moses. His book is full of speeches, for the ear is central. Jesus is law-giver. God is the Father and the God of heaven, and “kingdom of heaven” is Matthew’s term (pointing back to the symbolism of the Tabernacle).

Mark presents Jesus as a man of action. Mark presents Jesus as Lion/David, performing great works, swiftly going here and there, for the hand is central. In Mark, Jesus always does things “immediately.” Mark is shorter than Matthew not because Mark wrote first (what a silly argument!), but because Mark does not provide the great sermons. The field of action is the land.

Luke presents Jesus as the Eagle/Prophet, interacting with gentiles and women much more than the other two. In Luke, Jesus is always on the move, and half of his book is taken up with the Travel Narrative to Jerusalem, for the foot is central. The Spirit receives the great emphasis in Luke and Acts. The field of action is the world.

Finally, John presents Jesus as Man, the Image of God. The phrase “son of man” used in the other gospels points to Jesus as second Adamic priest, king, and prophet. The phrase “son of God” used in John points to Jesus as the image of God, true humanity as well as true God. John’s Jesus tours the sanctuary, which represents heaven. Thus, John puts us in the Throneland.

James B. Jordan, The Production of the New Testament Canon: A Revisionist Suggestion.

Now, Fruit of Lips is back in print.

John the evangelist was asked in his dotage why his sermon was so short that he would only say, “Children, keep each other at heart.” He gave the famous answer, “For two reasons: it is enough and the Lord has said so.”

The four gospels suffice since every one of the four claims made by Ichthys has become “lips” in one man’s dramatic change of mind. The Lord has made these four claims, no more. And he has said so. Let us read the Gospels once more: Do they give evidence of actual dependence beyond the “material” used? Yes, they do. They beget each other.

Every Gospel begins exactly at the point to which the previous Gospel has progressed on its tortuous path. The last word of the one sets the tune and is the overture for the next. The “last word” is not meant in a literal or pedantic sense; by it, we understand the last step of thought, reached in the dramatic progress.

If this is so, then the Gospels continue each other, each beginning to think and to speak where the previous evangelist had ended, and turning his final word into an opening of a new drama. Matthew’s last word is that Jesus has become the Son of God, in the sense of the Trinity. Mark begins: The Son of God (not “the Son of David,” as Matthew). Mark ends with the “Mission of the ministers of the word.” Fittingly, the missionary Luke begins with “the ministers of the word.” Luke, furthermore, ends Acts with a long statement: That the Jews have ears and do not hear and have eyes but do not see, but “the Gentiles shall hear.”

Majestically, John breaks in at exactly this last word of Acts: “Indeed, the darkness has not seen the light, the world has not seen it, but his own have beheld his glory, and we have seen him.” Also, Luke ends with the power of the Gospel; John begins with the World’s Power.

This is not an accident, this connection of ends and beginnings. Laboriously every Gospel works itself up to its climax. Easily the mantle of the Gospel writer then falls on the man who is prepared best to take over at this very point.

A detailed chart follows, but you will have to purchase the book for that: Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, Fruit of Lips.