In The Chronology of Josephus (Chapter 13), DR Martin basically debunks the timeline of Josephus and gives very good cause for the reasons he does so:

"The new historical information which has now come to light focuses on the fact of Herod’s death in 1 B.C.E. and the birth of Jesus in 3 B.C.E. But the main reason historians have accepted the 13 March, 4 B.C.E. eclipse as the one associated with Herod’s death is because of two primary factors: the first is a chronological indication made by Josephus concerning Herod’s length of reign, and the second involves the lengths of reign of the sons of Herod who were his successors.

"Let us note what Josephus said about the year lengths of Herod’s reign. We have to say “lengths” (in the plural) because Josephus gave two such indications. He said that Herod had a reign of 37 years from the time he was proclaimed king by the Romans and 34 years from the death of Antigonus which occurred after Herod captured Jerusalem. 1 Scholars have been prone to say that these indications would date the death of Herod to the year 3 B.C.E., but there was no eclipse of the Moon in that year. The nearest eclipse was that of 13 March, 4 B.C.E. Since astronomical data are such powerful evidences, many scholars within the last hundred years have felt it necessary to stretch the chronological statements of Josephus to make them fit the time of this eclipse. They do not mind stretching the facts in this regard because they have to in order to rescue the 13 March eclipse as the one associated with Herod’s death. This is why professors Vermes and Millar acknowledged that Josephus reckoned one year too many. 2 "

In this, the final, chapter of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, DR Ernest Martin discusses his reasoning, which is sound in our opinion, and provides a "Chronological Rundown of the Life and Time of Jesus:

"The nativity occurred on September 11, 3 B.C.E. Note the following sequence of historical events.

1. Joseph and Mary’s journey to Bethlehem for the “census” occurred at the very close of the Jewish civil year ― an apt time for a registration of peoples to happen. It was in the summer season and before the rains set in that would have made it difficult.
    
2. Jesus was born in a stable in the twilight period of September 11th, the Day of Trumpets, 3 B.C.E.
    
3. He was circumcised on September 18, 3 B.C.E. (the eighth day for the circumcision rite is reckoned inclusively).
    
4. He was dedicated in the temple on October 20/21, 3 B.C.E.
    
5. Luke says: they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth (Luke 2:39). This means they did not go to Egypt after the birth of Jesus. After all, they had only gone to Bethlehem for the “census,” not to move there. So, the family returned to Nazareth in the latter part of October, 3 B.C.E.
    
6. Then for some reason, they decided to move to Bethlehem. This could have been in the spring or summer of 2 B.C.E. They set up house, having no need for the temporary type of shelter they had when Jesus was born (Matthew 2:11).
    
7. On December 5th (Kislev 7) of 2 B.C.E. the youth tore down the eagle from the east entrance to the temple.
    
8. Then on December 25, 2 B.C.E., when the King planet Jupiter came to its stationary point in mid-Virgo the Virgin, it would have been seen “stopped over Bethlehem” as viewed from Jerusalem. The Magi then went to Bethlehem and gave the child the gifts they brought from the east. Jesus was now a paidion (Greek: toddler) not a brephos (Greek: infant, as in Luke). He was old enough to stand and to walk. In the papyrus codex Bodmer V of the Proto-Evangelium of James written in Egypt in the 4th century, it even states that the Magi were able to see Jesus “standing by the side of his mother Mary” (21:3). This shows early opinion that the visit of the Magi to give gifts to Jesus was long after his birth. This giving of gifts by the Magi would have occurred during the days of Hanukkah when Jewish fathers were accustomed to give gifts to their children. This would have appeared quite proper to Jewish people.
    
9. With the warnings of the Magi, Joseph and Mary immediately took Jesus to Egypt in late December of 2 B.C.E.
    
10. Immediately after this, Herod killed all the male children “from two years old and under” (Matthew 2:16). This matter of killing children two years old can now make better sense. If Jesus was born on 11 September, 3 B.C.E., the slaying of the innocents was about 15 months after his birth. If the conception period were also considered, it comes to 24 months exactly. This may be a helpful clue that Jesus was indeed born in September, 3 B.C.E. and why the Magi saw Jesus “standing by the side of his mother Mary.”
     
11. Soon afterward, the two illustrious rabbis were tried and sentenced by the Sanhedrin. This could have been in early January of 1 B.C.E., and then a few days later (on January 10th) the eclipse of the Moon occurred that Josephus mentioned.
     
12. Herod then died about January 28th (Schebat 2) in 1 B.C.E.
     
13. Later, in the spring of 1 B.C.E., the Passover occurred during which 3000 Jewish worshippers lost their lives in the temple.
     
14. In the summer and autumn of that year (1 B.C.E.) The War of Varus took place.
     
15. Then, about twenty-eight years later, Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist sometime in either October or November of C.E. 27 at the beginning of a Sabbatical Year. Jesus then began his official ministry with the Passover and Pentecost season of C.E. 28 and was finally crucified in C.E. 30.

"If what I am suggesting in this book is true, a new understanding in the life of Jesus emerges. Not only do many obscure passages in Josephus make sense, but the chronological and theological indications of the New Testament about the birth of Jesus also become clearer. Roman history as well becomes more understandable for the middle years of Augustus. And while none of us was living some 2000 years ago to prove these points as an eyewitness, there is enough evidence available to give us some reasonable assurance that this new information brings us pretty close to the truth.

"This means that the Star of Bethlehem can be identified and that it fits into the over-all historical theme to make this period in human history more understandable. This is just another reason why all historians who want to comprehend the proper history of Rome in the early Empire period need to focus their attention on “The Star that Astonished the World.” "

___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 30 DEC 2012. <http://www.askelm.com/star/star015.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at amazon.com. 

You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts.

Also available are all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM.

In The Census of Quintilius (Chapter Twelve), DR Martin focuses upon a difficulty in the identification of Quintilius Varus as a census taker at the time of Jesus' birth:

"Luke said that Jesus was born at a census when Quirinius (KJV: Cyrenius) was a ruler in Syria. This reference has been an enigma to historians for generations because no such census of Quirinius has been found by historians which could have occurred from 7 to 1 B.C.E. Scholars have stated that Luke simply did not know what he was talking about, and that he probably got his facts mixed-up with the census of Quirinius that took place in C.E. 6/7. There is undisputed evidence that Quirinius was governor beginning in C.E. 6/7 and that he conducted a census at that time (even Luke mentioned it ― Acts 5:37). But up to now, no available information has been discovered to show that Quirinius was an administrator (and a census taker) in 3/2 B.C.E. or in previous years. This new historical research, however, can find that census of Quirinius in the historical records which took place at Jesus’ nativity. In the New Testament, Luke actually states that the “census” was an enrollment or a registration of some kind. He does not say what Quirinius’ census was for; but we now can discover the reason for his census.

"Let us recall from the last chapter that Tertullian said that Roman records supported the fact that censuses (he used the plural) were conducted in Palestine at the time of Jesus’ birth. Tertullian said they took place at the time when Saturninus was governor of Syria. Tertullian, though, said nothing about Quirinius as conducting those censuses. This early Christian scholar also identified the year with that which we now reckon as 3/2 B.C.E. If the biblical narrative given to us by Luke and that of Tertullian can be married together, how could it be that two governors (Saturninus and Quirinius) were then in Syria at the same time? This poses a problem and it has been one of long standing.

"Perhaps Josephus provides a clue to help straighten out the mystery. The historian mentioned that actually there were “governors” (plural) in Syria during the rule of Saturninus. 1 While during the earlier governorships of Titius and Quintilius Varus, Josephus spoke of a “governor” (singular), 2 but during the administration of Saturninus why does he mention the plural “governors”?

"How many governors were there at this time? Josephus mentions the names of Saturninus and Volumnius. Were these the only men to whom Josephus was referring? Or, could Quirinius be considered as well? This is the very time Luke in his Gospel places the administration of a census by Quirinius. Since it is clear that Saturninus was the regular governor, it must be held that the rule of Quirinius was of a different and special nature. Such special status could well accord with the other types of commands that Quirinius held as attested in the historical records.

"Quirinius’ war against the Homonadenses, for which Tacitus singled him out for praise, has been called a “special command.” 3 This status is also reflected in an inscription which mentions Quirinius “as holding an honorary municipal office at Antioch-by-Pisidia.” 4 And it was certainly a special command for Quirinius when he became rector of the young Gaius Caesar when Gaius acquired residential authority at Antioch over the eastern provinces in C.E. 1. 5 Gaius was probably not strictly called the governor of Syria at the time (C.E. 1 to 4) and it may well be that Quirinius was responsible for running the everyday affairs of government. Tacitus said that Quirinius was one having “considerable talents for business.” 6 This could account for his selection as being “guardian” of Gaius who was the heir to the Empire. Too, as our historical reconstruction shows, Quirinius already had experience in Syria by administering the censuses Tertullian talked about in 3/2 B.C.E. which took place during the time when Saturninus was governor. All these references indicate special commands for Quirinius throughout his entire governmental career. There are other historical records about Quirinius which show his special assignments..."

We, as Christians, should know better than to question Luke's veracity!  DR Martin's research concludes in support of Luke and his claim that Jesus was born at a census:

"The simplicity and reasonableness of the explanation in this chapter is a strong point in its favor. And interestingly, this historical information harmonizes the Paphlagonian inscription with Tertullian (quoting Roman records); this agrees with Justin Martyr (quoting Roman records) and with Luke (writing to a Roman nobleman). Orosius and Moses of Khorene the Armenian historian confirm it.

"This means that the “census” of Quirinius which has eluded any positive identification by modern historians is now found in several historical sources and some of them right at the time the “census” occurred according to the chronology of the New Testament and that of secular history. In a word, the “census” of Quirinius associated with the nativity of Jesus has been found."

___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 30 DEC 2012. <http://www.askelm.com/star/star014.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at amazon.com. 

You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts.

Also available are all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM.

In The Two Governorships of Quintilius Varus (Chapter Eleven), DR Ernest L Martin states:  "If it can be shown historically that Quintilius Varus was in fact twice governor of Syria, it would give a great deal of validity to the chronological reconstruction I present in this book. And truly, that proof can be given."  In our opinion, DR Martin indeed proves his reconstruction beyond doubt.

"We thus have an interesting question regarding the governors of Syria at this crucial time in history. We find that Quintilius Varus was twice governor of Syria. Coins have been found which show that Varus was supervisor over Syria in the 25th, 26th and 27th years of the Actian Era (6 to 4 B.C.E.). And in the reference quoted above, Josephus states that Sentius Saturninus was governor just before Varus became governor again in 2 B.C.E. and he ruled in that capacity (this second time) from 2 B.C.E. till at least C.E. 1. So, between Varus’ two governorships of Syria, Sentius Saturninus ruled from the middle of 4 B.C.E. to the middle part of 2 B.C.E.

"Remarkably, the early Christian apologist Tertullian, who lived in the late 2nd century and was by profession a lawyer and well acquainted with Roman governmental affairs, said that the census that brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem was conducted when Sentius Saturninus was governor of Syria. And Tertullian in his work An Answer to the Jews, stated that Jesus was born in a year that we now recognize as 3/2 B.C.E. 2 This fits precisely with our reconstruction of history during this dark decade. It means that Quintilius Varus was governor of Syria from 6 to 4 B.C.E., followed by Sentius Saturninus from 4 to 2 B.C.E., and then followed again by Varus from 2 B.C.E. to at least C.E. 1.

DR Martin concludes:

"What is the outcome of these historical indications? They help to show,

• that Luke was right in placing Jesus’ nativity in 3 or 2 B.C.E.;
• that Tertullian was right in saying the censuses which brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem were during the governorship of Saturninus (3/2 B.C.E.);
• that the coins are right in showing a Syrian governorship of Varus from 6 to 4 B.C.E.,
• that Josephus was correct in showing another governorship for Varus from 2 B.C.E. to C.E. 1; and
• that the lapis tiburtinus shows the validity of the matter by confirming the dual governorship of Varus."

___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 29 DEC 2012. <http://www.askelm.com/star/star013.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at amazon.com. 

You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts.

Also available are all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM.

"The War of Varus actually broke out in Palestine in 1 B.C.E. And at that very time, the Roman records show that the Armenians in the northeastern section of the Empire also began to stir up rebellion. While this was happening,  the Parthians further east also in 1 B.C.E. maneuvered to take advantage of the  deteriorating military situation in Rome’s eastern provinces. Understanding that The War of Varus was in 1 B.C.E. can make these known activities of the  Armenians and the Parthians understandable.

There was another prime reason why we can know that The War of Varus was in 1 B.C.E. When significant conflicts took place outside the official boundaries of the Empire such as the war just after Herod’s death, it was customary for the emperor to be awarded an “imperial acclamation” if victory were achieved by Rome. And, as Professor Syme has noted, Roman records show that Augustus did in fact receive such an “acclamation” (his fourteenth) in 8 B.C.E., but not another  until C.E. 1. If Varus’ war occurred in 4 B.C.E., as scholars have wanted to  believe, why was there not an “acclamation” in 4 or 3 B.C.E.? That victory over  the Jews had all the earmarks for gaining such an award for Augustus. But if  that war and victory were in 1 B.C.E. (as actually was the case) then an “acclamation XV” in the following year of C.E. 1 becomes perfectly reasonable.  Professor Barnes has made it clear that the war which gave Augustus his “acclamation XV” in C.E. 1 to 2 must have occurred sometime between June, 2 B.C.E. and C.E. 1. 6 The dating of The War of Varus to  the summer of 1 B.C.E. fits the historical scenario perfectly. Augustus’ acclamation XV was actually given to him for Varus’ victory over the Jewish  rebellion.

Indeed, there is far more to it than that. When the proper chronology is recognized, more historical material can be understood about Roman affairs in the eastern provinces. Let us look at the matter closely.

And, in fact, DR Martin does just that.  In The War that No One Can Find (Chapter Ten), he looks at this matter closely.

___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 28 DEC 2012. <http://www.askelm.com/star/star012.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at amazon.com. 

You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts.

Also available are all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM.

In The Lunar Eclipse of Josephus (Chapter Nine), DR Ernest L Martin takes the investigation into the timing of major events a step further.  The Star of Bethlehem is starting to read like a great mystery novel!  I simply cannot put it down.  I quote from the source:

"Why should this be a problem? The truth is, it is a difficulty of major proportions. Josephus reported that a few days prior to the eclipse two important rabbis had encouraged some of the youth at Jerusalem to destroy a golden eagle which Herod had placed over the eastern gate of the temple. These religious leaders had interpreted the existence of this eagle as being contrary to the Law of Moses. And in broad daylight a number of young boys began to cut down the eagle.

"These Jewish youths were caught in the act and about forty of them were ordered to appear before Herod and the Sanhedrin (the Supreme Court of the nation) to answer for this outrage. The two rabbis who perpetrated the plan were  especially singled out for judgment. Realizing the great popularity of these two  religious leaders, Herod felt it wise to move their trial to Jericho and away  from the capital at Jerusalem. Herod, himself, was ill and since his winter home  was in Jericho he wanted to be in the warmer climate of the Jordan Valley to  alleviate the effects of his illness.

"This was accomplished. The rabbis and the young men who assisted them were finally convicted of high criminal actions (sacrilege and sedition). While most of the young men were given milder sentences, the two rabbis were ordered to be burnt alive. Now let us take up the story as recorded by Josephus. He will bring  us right up to the important eclipse of the Moon about which we have been talking.

" “They were found guilty of sacrilege against God therein. But the people, on account of Herod’s barbarous temper, and for fear he  should be so cruel as to inflict punishment on themselves, said, what was done,  was done without their consent, and it seemed to them that the perpetrators  might certainly be punished for what they had done. But with Herod, he dealt  more leniently with others; but he deprived Matthias of the high priesthood  partly because of this action, and made Joazar, who was Matthias’ wife’s  brother, high priest in his stead. Now it happened, that during the time of the  high priesthood of this Matthias, there was another individual made high priest  for a single day, that very day which the Jews observed as a fast. The situation  was this: this Matthias the high priest, on the night before that day when the  fast was to be celebrated, seemed in a dream to have sexual relations with a  woman; and because he could not officiate himself because of this, Joseph, the  son of Ellemus, his kinsman, assisted him in that sacred office. But Herod  deprived this Matthias of the high priesthood, and burnt alive the other  Matthias, who had raised the sedition, with his other accomplices. And that very  night there was an eclipse of the Moon.” 2 

"What has this information to do with the significance of our eclipse, assuming it was the one of March 13, 4 B.C.E.? The truth is, it is devastating to it. It means that those rabbis would have been burnt alive on the Jewish day of Adar 14, the first day of the two high days of Purim. No court, unless completely illegal, would have had criminals executed and certainly not rabbis on the special day commanded in the Bible when the Jews “rested ... a day of feasting and gladness” (Esther  9:17–18). The whole nation would have been in an uproar over such a procedure."

With careful study and examination, DR Martin is able to throw out certain dates that have been cited by historians, both ancient and modern, and come to conclusive proof that the day of Herod's death is January 10TH, 1 BCE.  He concludes and looks forward to Chapter Ten:

"In the next chapter, it will be shown that all these important historical events could only have occurred in 1 B.C.E. This major Roman/Jewish War that Josephus records took place in the summer and autumn of 1 B.C.E. and it was fought as a result of Herod’s death, the killing of the rabbis, and the Passover  massacre. For this reason, no lunar eclipses beyond the one of 10 January, 1  B.C.E. need be considered as being the eclipse mentioned by Josephus. The next  chapter will demonstrate why this is the case."

___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 27 DEC 2012. <http://www.askelm.com/star/star011.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at amazon.com.


You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts.

Also available are all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM.

One Saint continues with selected excerpts of The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin.  Today's focus is Astronomy and the Death of King Herod (Chapter Eight).

DR Martin first looks at the lunar eclipses of the time, and determines their importance when dating events, for they were usually witnessed and recorded in the historical record of the day.

"In the face of the historical evidence against it, the majority of theologians have up to now placed the birth of Jesus before the spring of 4 B.C.E. They have insisted on this early date because of a reference in Josephus that King Herod died not long after an eclipse of the Moon and before a springtime Passover of the Jews. This eclipse has become an important chronological benchmark in reckoning the year of Herod’s death.

"Eclipses are powerful astronomical indicators to show the precise times when events happened in history. Even those that happened 2000 years ago can be calculated to within a few minutes of their occurrence, and if one can pick the proper lunar eclipse that Josephus referred to, then further historical inquiry is considered unnecessary because “astronomy” has settled the chronological issue.

"Those theologians who adopted this astronomical principle for solving chronological questions are absolutely correct. There is no arguing with eclipses. They are solid and unchallenged witnesses to support the truth of early historical records — if the correct eclipse is considered. But when astronomers in the last century told theologians that an eclipse of the Moon occurred during the evening of March 13, 4 B.C.E. (and could be seen in Palestine), this eclipse is the one that theologians accepted as the one referred to by Josephus. They particularly preferred this eclipse because Josephus also said Herod died before a springtime Passover. Since March 13, 4 B.C.E. was just one month before the Passover, they felt justified in placing all historical events associated with Herod’s death and his funeral within that twenty-nine day period. The truth is, however, it is completely illogical to squeeze the events mentioned by Josephus into that short  period of time. By selecting the wrong eclipse, modern scholars have been forced  to tighten considerably the historical events into an abnormally compressed  space of only twenty-nine days.

"Eclipse records are very important, but they must be interpreted correctly regarding the chronological period in which they occur. Over a ten-year period, several lunar eclipses are capable of being observed in most areas of the world.  Two or three can even occur in one year. This relative frequency of lunar  eclipses can be a problem in identifying the ones mentioned by the ancient  historians if the early historians gave no details about the time of night, the  day of the week, the calendar date on which they happened, or whether the  eclipses were full or partial. With the eclipse of Josephus, none of these  factors is evident. Josephus gave the single clue that a springtime Passover was  celebrated not long after the eclipse. This would appear a reasonable hint that  the eclipse happened sometime in the early or late winter..."

DR Martin elaborates with convincing argument and concludes with the likely timing of the death of King Herod.

___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 26 DEC 2012. <http://www.askelm.com/star/star010.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at amazon.com. 

You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with    George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts.

Also available are all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM.

One Saint continues with selected quotations from DR Ernest L Martin's The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.  Today's focus is on The Dark Decade in History (Chapter Seven).  DR Martin discusses the fact "that the decade from 6 B.C.E. to C.E. 4 is one of the most nebulous in the history of Rome."  He continues:

"It is a common lament among Roman historians that this ten-year period (one of the most important in the history of western civilization) bristles with many historical and chronological difficulties because of the garbled or imperfect records that have come down to us.

"Professor Timothy Barnes rightly states that “the years of Tiberius’ retirement from public life are one of the most obscure decades in the history of the Roman Empire” (emphasis mine). 1 Sir Ronald Syme echoed the same sentiment when he spoke about “the hazards inherent in the obscure decade 6 B.C.E.–C.E. 4” (emphasis mine). 2 If there was ever a “dark decade” in the history of Rome, it is this one. And sadly, this lack of information occurs at the very time the historian who specializes in the time of Augustus Caesar and the birth of Jesus needs it most. A great deal of confusion emerges within and among the historical records, and this is no exaggeration."

DR Martin looks closely at "The Difficulties with Secular Records," "The Anomalies of Josephus," "Chronological Errors in Josephus," Josephus' lack of understanding of "Even Standard Dating Systems," and yet more problems with Josephus' accounting of the time:

"One thing for certain, Josephus was a very subjective writer. With his own words he admitted that the writing of his autobiography was to assure his Roman benefactors that he was thoroughly pro-Roman in every respect. 23 His loyalty to Rome went so far that he identified the prophesied Messiah of the Old Testament as being Vespasian, the Roman Emperor. 24

"And another point. It has amazed Jewish scholars that Josephus said not one word about the most important rabbi from the close of the Old Testament period until modern times ― Hillel the First. This rabbi was most prominent in Jewish affairs and he lived at the exact time of Josephus’ silence on chronological matters. Josephus full well knew of Hillel’s prestige...

"The truth is, Josephus may have tried to give a reasonable appraisal of certain historical events, but it is what he left out (or gave no chronological indications about) that gives us of modern times problems in understanding what actually happened at this crucial period of time. There were good reasons for Josephus to adopt his subjective approach. To be frank, he was interested in keeping the top part of his anatomy attached to its nether parts.

"To stay alive, Josephus had to watch very carefully what he wrote. Had he been too plain, not only would he have been in jeopardy of losing his life, but his historical works would have gone up in smoke as well. He must have felt it prudent to judiciously avoid giving comment on certain crucial periods (and especially to the mention of some key individuals) because the political climate in Rome did not warrant plain speaking. One could hardly blame him."

And "Worse Yet, the Manuscripts of Josephus Have Been Edited!"  In conclusion, DR Martin compares "Early Christian Historians" to "The Chaotic Conclusions of Modern Scholars."

"In a book titled Chronos, Kairos, Christos published in 1989 by the prestigious firm of Eisenbrauns as a Festschrift in honor of one of the finest chronologists of our day, Professor Jack Finegan, the two editors (Dr. Jerry Vardaman and Dr. Edwin M. Yamauchi) included articles of research from some of the top scholars today in the field of chronology regarding the time for Jesus’ nativity. Both Vardaman and Yamauchi must be congratulated for having the courage to publish the various articles (almost all of them contradictory to one another in many of their essential factors). The disunity of opinion among the scholars, as shown in this book, is so wide in their evaluation of the historical sources that the only reasonable word to describe this state of scholarly affairs is “chaos.” Confusion presently reigns among the scholars. The laity need to know about this chaos that presently prevails in the professional research now being conducted. The above book does the job of showing this chaos (and one should be thankful for its candor)."

Chapter Seven, The Dark Decade in History, is a fascinating study of the lack of proper record keeping and the fact that we know very little today.  That said, one has to note that DR Martin's thorough and methodical research into the matter of the birth of Jesus is much appreciated by One Saint!

___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 25 DEC 2012 <http://www.askelm.com/star/star009.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at
amazon.com.

You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts. 

Also available are all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM.

We continue with a summary of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World.  Chapter Five is scholarly, dedicated to scriptural reference and fascinating in scope.  Included are wonderful illustrations of the astronomy appropriate to the time.  DR Martin delves into the Word to determine the hour of the birth of Jesus.  It is amazing how close to scripture he cleaves.  Following are selected quotes from The Time of Jesus' Birth (Chapter Five), by DR Ernest L Martin. 

"The suggestion was made in the last chapter that the Magi presented their gifts to Jesus on December 25, 2 B.C.E. This was not, however, the time of his birth. When the Magi arrived, Joseph and Mary were no longer in a stable with Jesus. They were now residing in a house (Matthew 2:11). Jesus had  been circumcised (Luke 2:21) and dedicated at the temple some forty days after  his birth (Luke 2:22–24). He was then being called a paidion (toddler)  and no longer a brephos (infant). When the Magi arrived, Jesus was  already walking and was able to speak a few words as most normal children would  be able to do when several months old. Soon after the Magi left, Herod killed  the male children in and around Bethlehem who were two years of age or younger  (Matthew 2:16). This does not mean Jesus was exactly two years old at the time.  The fact that all children two years and under were slain shows that Herod was  taking every possible interpretation of the Magi into account for the time of  Jesus’ birth.

"There is biblical information which could go a long way in helping us understand the general time period for Jesus’ birth. Luke gave more chronological data regarding the birth and ministry of Jesus than any other biblical writer. In doing this, Luke began his story with John the Baptist. He gave some chronological indications as to the time of John’s conception and birth. Though his statements are general, they are plain enough to indicate the approximate time of John’s birth, and consequently that of Jesus himself. This chronological information is found in Luke’s first chapter. Note what Luke said, “There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a  certain priest named Zechariah, of the course Abijah and his wife was of the aughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.”  Luke 1:5

"This verse tells us something about the parents of John the Baptist. Zechariah was a priest whose duty it was, on certain occasions, to offer the national sacrifices in the temple at Jerusalem. While he was accomplishing his assigned requirements, Luke said an angel came to him and told him that his wife Elizabeth would bear a child. Zechariah could hardly believe what he was told because Elizabeth was beyond the age of childbearing. The angel understood his reason for disbelief; so, Zechariah was struck dumb to prove the certainty of what was prophesied. When Zechariah came out of the inner temple, the people perceived that he had seen a vision and were amazed that he was unable to speak.  They realized that something significant had been pointed out to Zechariah..."

According to DR Martin, there were 24 Courses that were considered to be calendar indications.  He continues to delve into their chronology.

He discusses the year of the birth of Jesus:

"If Jesus was about 30 years old near the commencement of the emperor’s 15th year (as reckoned by people in the east), then His birth was in  3 B.C.E. Recall that Luke tells us that Jesus was born at the time of a Roman  census or enrollment. If we can determine the period of that registration, this  will help to pinpoint the year of the nativity. This is where the new historical  information offered in this book becomes essential. We now know that an  Empire-wide citizen registration took place for the award of the Pater  Patriae upon Augustus in early 2 B.C.E. 3 This was the census Luke  meant. I will give a full account of this registration (a census) in a further  chapter of this book titled “The Census of Quirinius” (Chapter 12).  But let me  briefly rehearse some of the evidence that shows when the census mentioned in  the New Testament took place."

The Census of Quirinius, The Birth of John the Baptist, and the Eight Course of Abijah are studied.  Then Ernest returns to the birth of Jesus:

"Let us now look at the birth of Jesus. From what we have observed about the approximate time of John’s birth, it should be easy to compute that of Jesus. Luke said that Jesus was conceived sometime in the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy (Luke 1:26, 36). Five full months had passed and Elizabeth was then in  her sixth month. Since John the Baptist was probably born some time around March  10, 3 B.C.E., Jesus’ birth would be near September in 3 B.C.E. We will soon see  from other astronomical data that this is the only year that will satisfy all  the facts. It must be admitted that it is impossible to arrive at an exact  birthday for either John or Jesus based on the priestly courses, yet the  information provided by Luke helps us to pick the approximate periods with some  confidence. Two or three weeks each way would be the outside limit."

He picks a date, and then elaborates on the time.  He determines it was the time of the New Moon, and references scripture to back up his reasoning.  DR Martin concludes:

"What a significant day for the appearance of the Messiah to arrive on earth from the Jewish point of view! And remarkably, no other day of the year could astronomically fit Revelation 12:1–3. The apostle John is certainly showing forth an astronomical sign which answers precisely with the Jewish New Year Day.  John would have realized the significance of this astronomical scene that he was  describing."

"“And there was a great wonder [sign] in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: and she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. And there appeared another wonder [sign] in heaven; and behold a  great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon  his head. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast  them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be  delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth  a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron.”  Revelation 12:1-5"


You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts. 

Also available are all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM.

___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 21 DEC 2012 <http://www.askelm.com/star/star006.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at
amazon.com. 

One Saint continues with selected quotations from Ernest L Martin's work, The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World. 

You can read or listen to The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World at the ASK ELM website.

You can also listen to David Sielaff’s wonderful audio interview with George Ann Hughes at the Byte Show.  These files bring us up to date, for David Sielaff continues the work of Ernest L Martin today.  You will find the full interview at The Byte Show.  Scroll way down to The Star of Bethlehem series, in fourteen parts. 

You can also listen to all eleven parts of The Star of Bethlehem interviews Ernest L Martin did with Jeff Rense at ASK ELM:


Following are excerpts from The Real Star of Bethlehem (Chapter Four)...

"...The Magi focused on Judaea and not Rome at this crucial time in history.

"Let us look at some of the astrological and biblical factors that may have brought the Magi to Jerusalem and then to Bethlehem. Since the New Testament says the Magi saw the “star” rising in the east, it would most naturally be called a “morning star.” The Book of Revelation has Jesus saying of himself, “I am the root and offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.” 1 The apostle Peter also mentioned that Jesus was symbolically associated with “the day star.” 2

"The above verses refer to celestial bodies that were well known and recognized in the 1st century and they inspired symbolic messianic interpretation by early Christians. There were several prophecies in Isaiah which generally were interpreted as referring to the Messiah. One has definite astronomical overtones to it. Isaiah said, “The Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.” 3 This prophecy could easily refer to the rising of some star. It would be particularly appropriate to a “morning” or “day” star. Luke, in his Gospel, referring to the celestial symbolism of Isaiah 60:3 which spoke of God as being “the daybreak [the rising] from on high that hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness.” 4

"These references reveal that celestial bodies were symbolically important to the New Testament writers. We know that the generality of the world was then engrossed with such symbolic concepts. The rising of a star or planet just before sunrise was particularly significant in interpreting events relating to important people. And Luke in his Gospel refers to Jesus as a star which will bring great light to all the world.

"With this in mind, let us recall from our first chapter that on morning of August 12, 3 B.C.E. (about an hour and twenty minutes before sunrise), Jupiter rose as a morning star in conjunction with Venus..."

DR Martin continues to delve into the astronomical happenings of the day:  the "Grand Astronomical Displays...  Signaling the Birth of a King," "The King Planet...  And More Spectacular Signs." 

But what about the "star that stood still?"

"It is this description of the star standing still that has caused many interpreters to characterize the whole episode in Matthew as either fictitious or a miraculous event. Most people find it difficult to imagine a normal heavenly body having the capability of stopping its movement over a small village in Palestine. At first thought, a person might agree that such a thing appears impossible. But maybe the account is not as ridiculous as it may seem. In truth, there is not the slightest difficulty for such a thing to happen.

"The truth is, Matthew was simply describing a celestial phenomenon in popular language that all astronomers and persons acquainted with basic planetary motions would have been fully aware. Planets do come to a “stop” at prescribed times in their heavenly motions. This happens at the time for a planet’s retrogression and progression. It may be that Matthew was simply showing that Jupiter had become stationary in its motions through the fixed stars at the time it reached its zenith over Bethlehem."

Further, it was the winter solstice.  Martin cites:

"“General observance required that on the 25th of December the birth of the ‘new Sun’ should be celebrated, when after the winter solstice, the days began to lengthen and the invincible star triumphed again over darkness.” 28

Martin then focuses upon the Interpretation of the Magi, Jewish Feast of Hanukkah and describes how the "Whole Jewish Nation Was in Celebration."  He concludes with the Magi giving "Their Gifts At Hanukkah."

"What we find in this unique calendar circumstance is that the Jews were seeing Jesus as the Messiah by having the Magi give their gifts in the midst of their celebration of Hanukkah, while the heathen peoples in the world were seeing the Magi represent them at the time of their Winter Solstice celebrations. It is interesting that these festival occasions occurred in combination to one another in that year. Jewish and pagan celebrations combined for that year."

We continue to celebrate the birth of Our Lord and Savior Today.

 ___________
Martin, Ernest L. “The Star of Bethlehem:  The Star that Astonished the World.” 19 DEC 2012. <http://www.askelm.com/star/star004.htm>

You can purchase the hardbound version of The Star of Bethlehem: The Star that Astonished the World, by DR Ernest L Martin at amazon.com.