Last month we started this journey analyzing the topic of when Yeshua was born and whether or not we are to memorialize His birth annually. In the previous article, we addressed the topic of whether birthday celebrations were permitted in the Bible. We also looked at examples of birth announcements throughout Scripture. In this concluding article, we will tackle the various thoughts on when Yeshua was born.

The three most common thoughts on when Yeshua was born are:

Spring Birth

Fall Birth

December Birth

In this article, we will look at these three common theories and outline how they align with Scripture. The goal is to better educate you, our audience, on these different schools of thought so that you can make what you feel is the best decision for your spiritual walk. We see throughout the Scriptures that God gives us specific dates or directions for the celebration of His feasts and festivals, but do we see that same pattern when it comes to the birth of Yeshua? Can we truly know exactly when He was born?

Was Messiah Born in the Spring?

The most common argument made for Messiah being born in the spring is the fact that in Israel, shepherds were more commonly in the fields at night watching over their flocks in the springtime. This hypothesis, at face value, isn’t a bad one. It does, however, fail to address the fact that there were shepherds in the fields at night during different seasons in Israel. The “infancy narratives” in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke contradicts historical information. Most scholars agree that neither Matthew’s nor Luke’s account of the birth were meant to be historical in nature, but more theological. There are no other Gospel accounts of the birth to help provide other clues. It simply isn’t wise to try to draw any conclusions on the season of Messiah’s birth using these two Gospel accounts.

The Book of Mormon and the Church of Latter-Day Saints have commonly taught that Messiah was born in the spring. The Church of Latter-Day Saints, in their Doctrine and Covenant 20:1, teaches that Messiah was born April 6th. They state that they were directed by revelation to this conclusion. The Book of Mormon in 3 Nephi 8:5, states that the birth and crucifixion of Messiah occurred during the same season of year. Therefore, this would place the birth in the early spring.

Astronomical claims have also tried to tie certain stars or planets to being visible during the spring season in the years claimed to be the birth of Messiah. The writings of Josephus are commonly used to back up this theory. Just as the dating of Herod the Great’s death is commonly debated , there are some inconsistencies with the various datings of Herod’s son Archelaus’, reign in conjunction with Herod’s death in Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews.

Another more recent argument is tied to the Passover lambs being raised and prepared by the Temple Priesthood. The argument goes into the history of the lambs being raised, tended to, and kept in preparation for the Pascal Sacrifice. In this argument, they tie the narrative of Yeshua being our Passover Lamb and Pascal Sacrifice to the concept that He would have been born during the same season. While this makes for a great story, there is no historical evidence to substantiate that claim. It is entirely possible, but it is not conclusive.

As Messianic believers, we know that God works through and around His Feast cycles. It would make sense that the birth of Messiah was tied to that same cyclical pattern. However, we don’t have any conclusive evidence to be able to say with any authority that Messiah was born in the spring. Since The Book of Mormon and the doctrines of the Church of Latter-Day Saints don’t qualify as Scripture, using them as primary sources would be unwise. It is also important to note that BYU has published articles challenging the spring birth as doctrine inside the Church of Latter-Day Saints. Allowing seasons to dictate a conclusion without any other historical evidence would also be unwise of us. So, we cannot conclusively say that Messiah was born in the spring.

Was Messiah Born in the Fall?

One of the most common teachings is that Messiah was born in the fall. Most of the teachings utilize a couple of key elements to make this claim:

Luke 2:8 (shepherds in field at night)

The birth of John the Baptizer

The census being tied to the Feast of Tabernacles

In the previous section, we looked at the “infancy narrative” concept of Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts being more theological than historical. We also addressed some of the disputes with historical records as to whether Matthew and Luke could be taken as historically accurate. It does appear, although we cannot say with certainty, that Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts of the birth was not to be used as historical but theological.

And in the same region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. Luke 2:8

Most flocks of sheep in Israel were not kept outdoors during the mid-October to mid-March season. However, when the winter rains fell, the hills were clothed with grass and shepherds would take their sheep further away from the town. They would then stay with them in the field to keep watch so that they didn’t fall prey to wild beasts. It is entirely possible that shepherds would have their flocks in the fields during the winter, since winters in Israel are milder than in countries situated further north. This is, of course, inconclusive and, to date, no one has a written historical record that, it actually occurred this way during the birth of Messiah, even if it was possible.

The birth of John the Baptizer has also been used to try to provide a better timeline for the birth of Messiah. The Gospel of Luke tells us that it was in the sixth month after the conception of John the Baptizer that the angel appeared to Mary.

After these days his wife Elizabeth conceived, and for five months she kept herself hidden, saying, “Thus the Lord has done for me in the days when he looked on me, to take away my reproach among people.” In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. Luke 1:24:27

Messiah is six months younger than John the Baptizer. The next question then becomes can we determine when John was conceived? We know that John’s father Zacharias was a priest and had priestly functions. Many utilize the Gospel of Luke to suggest that John’s conception would have occurred in mid-June, placing his birth in mid-March. This would then put Messiah’s birth in September/October time frame. It is entirely possible, but it certainly is not conclusive.

Three times a year all males were to return to Jerusalem: Passover, Shavuot, and the Feast of Tabernacles. It is commonly taught that it would have made sense to do the Roman census during one of those times. The males would already be returning, and it would be easier to get a good count during one of those times. It is also a historical fact that the Roman tax was collected during the fall. These two elements are then used to conclude that Messiah could have been born during the Feast of Tabernacles. After all, Immanuel means “God with us,” the dwelling of God with men. Is there compelling reasoning here that Messiah was born during the Feast of Indwelling to dwell with man? We simply cannot say with certainty that there is enough conclusive evidence to support this position.

Just like with the Spring birth, there is no biblical or historical evidence to conclusively determine that Messiah was born during the fall. There is more circumstantial evidence to point towards a fall birth than spring, in our humble conclusion, but we cannot state that He was born in the fall with any hard facts.

Was Messiah Born in December?

The most commonly kept teaching is that Yeshua was born in December. Every year 2.3 billion people pack churches, online services, and home groups to honor the birth of Yeshua. So how did December become the most popular celebration date?

Dionysius Exiguus established the current Christian calendar (around 525 AD) based upon his interpretation of the birth of Yeshua. Dionysius was attempting to replace the Diocletian calendric system which denoted years beginning at the start of the reign of Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus. Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus was the Roman emperor from 284 to 305 AD. Dionysius had hoped his calendar would help repair the major divisions within the church over when Easter was to be kept. Dionysius calculated Messiah’s birthdate as December 25, 753 AUC (Ab Urbe Condita, “from the founding of the city” [Rome]). The founding of Rome translates to 753 BC in the Gregorian calendar. There are two main speculations as to how Dionysius ended up with these dates. The first is that he based his dates on Luke’s gospel. Early in this article we showed that Luke’s gospel was possibly not to be used as a historical marker but a theological one. The second speculation is that he based his dates on the tradition that Roman emperor Augustus reigned for 43 years, followed by the emperor Tiberius.

It is also important to note that during Dionysius’ lifetime it was a common Jewish tradition that a person died on the day they were conceived. Both Dionysius and Hippolytus (born c.170 and died c.235) believed Jesus was conceived and died on March 25th. Logically counting forward nine months gave them the date December 25th. However, the Eastern Orthodox church had His date of birth January 6th.

In 350 AD, Pope Julius of the Roman Catholic Church declared December 25th to be the official date of the birth of Messiah.

One argument used against a December birth harkens back to our earlier point about shepherds not being in the fields mid-October through mid-March in Israel. Since winter months in Israel are traditionally milder than that of other places, it is entirely possible that the shepherds could have been in the fields in December.

When Was Messiah Born?

The short answer is, we have no provable idea. The three major theories all have major holes in them. They require a great deal of speculation and inconclusive evidence. So, if you are looking for a black and white answer, the Bible simply doesn’t offer one. Is it possible it doesn’t offer one because the point of Messiah’s birth was not the date? Is it possible that the celebration of Messiah’s lowly entrance into this world was not about when to celebrate it, but about the fact that we should celebrate daily the reality that the King came to bring Heaven to earth?

We believe that more than likely, Messiah’s birth was tied to a Feast, yet we cannot prove it. One thing is for sure though, there have been a lot of teachings and division over something that isn’t concrete. It isn’t commanded, nor is it condemned in the Bible. A very strong case can be made biblically for celebrating or memorializing it. Whether you do that in the spring, the fall, the winter, or the summer, there isn’t enough conclusive evidence to tell you that you have the right or the wrong date.

The birth of Messiah is a cornerstone of the Christian faith, one the Messianic movement doesn’t really have an answer for. Are we missing a golden opportunity to witness to our fellow Christians by placing more emphasis on the birth of Messiah during the Feasts?

As we continue to seek the Lord in our journey, let us weigh matters more equally and righteously. Let us not take the creative license as many have, and spin stories around the birth of Messiah and declare that to be fact. Let us be honest. There are some things in the Bible that aren’t specific and direct. We don’t need to make them specific and direct to make our faith and walk more righteous. God was always enough, His word is always pure, and our approach to our brothers and sisters in the faith should be as well! The date of Messiah’s birth is not a salvation issue and should not be cause for inserting a wedge of resentment between brothers and sisters of the faith. All things are to be done with love and not malice. Since there is no concrete evidence to prove a specific date, we should stop making this a topic of division.