The Opened Scroll Ministry

In my previous blogs titled “Total solar eclipse before Augustus' death proves Herod the Great's death wasn't on 4 BC” , and "Midrash Rosh Hashana proves Herod the Great's death wasn't on 4 BC" , I explained in great detail why I don’t support the revised date of 4 BC for Herod’s death. In this blog, I will be explaining now why I support the traditional date of 1 BC instead, and how the many fierce arguments against this unpopular opinion can all be answered with finality. According to the famed 1st century AD historian Titus Flavius Josephus , Herod's death and elaborate funeral was preceded by a lunar eclipse and followed by Passover. I believe this lunar eclipse was the total lunar eclipse that happened on January 10, 1 BC which was visible in Israel at 04:05 AM Jerusalem time. At this time of the day in Jerusalem, the Sun’s altitude was still 33.37° below horizon , and this means that it was technically night time when the maximum eclipse of t

The famed 1st century AD historian Titus Flavius Josephus tells us the length of time of Herod’s reign: Antiquities of the Jews — Book XVII 8:1 When [Herod the Great] had done these things, he died, the fifth day after he had caused Antipater to be slain: having reigned since he had procured Antigonus to be slain thirty four years: but since he had been declared King by the Romans thirty seven. In addition, Josephus also tells us that shortly before Herod had procured his rival king Antigonus to be slain, Jerusalem first suffered destruction under Herod’s command. And that according to him, this happened exactly 27 years to the day, after Pompey also destroyed Jerusalem in a strikingly similar catastrophic manner: Antiquities of the Jews — Book XIV Chapter 16: 4. This destruction befel the city of Jerusalem when Marcus Agrippa and Caninius Gallus were consuls of Rome; on the hundred eighty and fifth olympiad; on the third month; on the solemnity of the fast. As if a periodical

Most scholarship concerning the date of Herod's death follows Emil Schürer 's calculations, which revised a traditional death date of 1 BC to 4 BC. W.E. Filmer (“The Chronology of the Reign of Herod the Great,” The Journal of Theological Studies, pp. 283–298) tells us why: "One of the chief reasons for supposing that Herod died in 4 B.C. is that his sons who succeeded him appear to have begun their reigns in that year. Thus Archelaus, ruler of Judea and Samaria, was banished in 7 A.D. after a reign of ten years; Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, who died in 40 A.D., reigned, according to coin evidence, forty-three years, while Philip, tetrarch of Iturea, died in the 20th year of Tiberius, 34 A.D., after a reign of thirty-seven years." In spite of this, some people, including myself, still support the traditional date of 1 BC for Herod's death. But how does one reconcile the 3 years difference between what seems to be the year Herod’s successors ascended

The tradition that connects a cave with Christ's birth is very ancient. Justin Martyr , an early Christian apologist, (circa 150 AD) mentions it, as does Origen about a hundred years later. Now many will argue that the Bible did not mention Christ being born in a cave, but only mentioned him being laid in a manger: Luke 2: 6-7 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them. Now there is nothing in the Bible that says this manger was not inside a cave either. So the tradition that Christ was born in a cave can still harmonize with what the Bible tells us about Christ’s nativity. But still, others will argue that the infant Christ was seen inside a house and not a cave when the Magi from the east first saw him: Matthew 2: 9-11 After they had heard the king, they [the Magi] went on their way, and the star they had se