So when was Jesus born, exactly??

I see a lot of people say, "Keep Christ in Christmas..." I'm like why? Did He pop out of it somehow? Has He escaped? Or isn't He as interested in it as a lot of us like to think He is?

I say, if Christ is in Christmas, He will evince it (make it evident), for the Scripture says Jerub-Baal, or let the Lord contend. If He's not, then somebody's been trying to put His name on someone else's holiday. Like, say, oh.... Saturnalia? Tammuz? Odin's birth? ... Hmmmm..... Funny how they all land on Dec. 25 and predate Christ. I'd hate to think God's not original.

The astronomer Adam Rutherford, using Biblical clues and evidence from Flavius Josephus among other sources, as well as astronomical science, actually determined that Jesus Christ was not born on Christmas (which is a word meaning Christ-Mass, mass being from masa, the barley cakes Babylonians and other pagan nations baked to Astarte the Queen of Heaven.) He was born, but not at that time of year.

A common farming and shepherding practice of seasonal migration, called transhumance, which was practiced in the Mediterranean results in herdsmen taking to the mountains for summer forage, not winter -- so you didn't see shepherds hanging around the Jerusalem hills in December to get rained and snowed on when the valleys are milder. They came up for the summer half of the year after the hot sun and lack of rain dried out the lowlands. (So much for Silent Night, huh.) That means Jesus's birth had to occur, from the Biblical evidence, during the summer half of the year, May to October.

Next factor for time of year was the birth of John... that can be dated on the calendar from the week his father Zechariah served his course in the Temple in Jerusalem. Luke records that he was in the course of Abijah, which served the 8th week after Passover and after the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkoth.) When he came home he "knew" his wife Elizabeth -- 80 plus years old and a miracle happened. Six months later Mary the BVM encounters Elizabeth and little John in the womb leaps, and Mary is pregnant soon thereafter. Add nine months and out comes Jesus. Well... here's some math -- add 6 plus 9 and you get 15 months after Zechariah's turn at the altar (not his wedding, but pleasure follows.) :) If it's after Passover, his course occurs somewhere in June (depending on the year), and if after Sukkoth, it ends up in December. Add 15 months, you get either September the year later, or March. You can go to Adam Rutherford for the exact calculation which also figures in the spectacular astronomical conjunctions of 3 to 2 BC.

In any case, from the Bible clues we know Jesus was born either in early spring or in early fall... well... transhumance tells us early spring is out -- still too cold and wet for the shepherds to take to the hills. They didn't get there till May or June in most places. There is also not much going on in Jerusalem in early spring -- Passover is still a month away generally. So... no room at the inn? I'd say there is. A little evidence changes the whole story, doesn't it?

So what about September? Rutherford's dating brings the birth of Jesus to late in the month, landing RIGHT ON Rosh Hashanah that year, 2 BC, as he calculated it -- not using the common medieval formula which was not in use for centuries still to come, but the practical dead reckoning of the day, which involved tracking the vernal equinox, spotting new moons, and other astronomical observations made by the priests. It comes out to September 29, 2 BC, to make a long story short. What's going on in Jerusalem and Bethlehem then?

How about throngs of people crowding into the Jerusalem metro area for the High Holy Days which begin with Rosh Hashanah itself? No room at the inns, they're all taken... people are loaded with offerings and money to bring to the Temple... which is how the Romans get to tax them, too. And the shepherds? It's still hot in Israel in late September. They're in the hills, in the right spot, plus they too worship at the Temple.

Rutherford and Dr. Gene Scott have gone into more depth, but basically I'm convinced the birth of Christ had nothing to do with the "16" or now I hear "30 crucified saviors" or "white masters" -- white being their clothing -- or other such December 25 related connections. He was born on or very close to September 29, 2 BC, Rosh Hashanah, a holiday God ordained on Mount Sinai to Moses; the wise men's gifts of gold, myrrh, and frankincense were for Him alone as gifts from subjects giving to their King. The closest you get to December 25 is maybe His conception... but count back 280 days from September 29 for a normal term... December 23. Give or take a few days or even a week, still a normal pregnancy. It's possible. But who ever mentions an Immaculate Conception being Dec. 25 for the "16 crucified saviors" or the "30 Ascended Masters?" It's always a birth, isn't it. But it ain't Jesus's birth.

Maybe some prophet way back when received info about how and when the Messiah would enter the world... but didn't get the rest of the memo...the BIRTH DATE.... and all those ancient idolaters never got the rest of the story....?

For the Rapture to happen in 2011...

First of all, forget the date favored by Harold Camping in May, that has nothing to do with the Feast of Trumpets, when the trumpet will sound and call those who trust Christ to go home to the Lord, escaping death and soon establishing the kingdom of the saints. The Rapture of the Church (not to be confused with later catchings-away of other believers in the Tribulations such as the 144,000, the two prophets and the multitude later on) will take place on Jesus Christ's real birthday on the Jewish calendar, the Feast of Trumpets. No matter what year it is, that's the date on the calendar of the catching away of His people.

Second, the construction of the Temple, for reasons I've given in earlier articles in this blog, must be already underway. This requires there to be a red heifer so that ashes may be provided for purification rituals in Jewish law. This is not a Christian process; the people doing this will not be those who are getting in the Church Rapture, but the Jewish priests who are serving into the time of the Antichrist. I don't know if the sacrifice of the heifer is required for the construction of the Temple, but it IS required for the sacrifices on the altar, so without it there is no point to building the Temple complete with the altar. As stated before, Israeli engineers say they need a year to complete it, and the sacrifices MUST begin, proceed, be interrupted and the desolation of the sanctuary last 2,300 days into the seven year Tribulation period under Antichrist, 45 days after the end of which he comes to perdition and the Lord returns to Jerusalem. I've counted back and that comes back to spring, near or on Passover that the sacrifices begin. That makes that Passover six months AFTER the Rapture, and since it takes a year to build the Temple, construction must have begun around the Passover BEFORE that Rosh Hashanah that Christ takes His people home.

In short, if they don't find a red heifer, they aren't going to build it... but if they DO start to build it BEFORE or AROUND Passover, it opens the door to the Rapture that fall. One other thing... I've also timed out (at least approximately) the time of the ending of the sacrifice with the Antichrist's invasion and desolation of the Temple, which occurs the same time as the killing of the two prophets or witnesses which we take to be Moses and Elijah (not Enoch, he already witnesses to this day through his mighty works of stone on the Giza plateau and possibly other places.) Count back 42 months of 30 days (1,260 days) and by my count they arrive about six weeks or so BEFORE the catching away of the Church. So we will have warning when this is about to take place.

Word to the wise....

To Whom It May Concern,

When submitting comments to this or to any blog, please refrain from using disrespectful language and manners, please be sure your comments are factually based (references are always nice), and please do not use these blogs for commercial solicitation. Your comments are welcome provided these conditions are met.

Thank you.

Turtle

Temple Mount ... when does it get destroyed? Not that soon.

I no longer believe the Temple Mount is in danger of imminent earthquake or other great disaster, before the Rapture or Great Tribulations, because in my opinion now, the prophesied destruction on the Mount is much more likely to occur during the earthquake of Revelation 11, upon the deaths and resurrection of the two witnesses that prophesy against the Beast. This event seems also to coincide with the Beast's conquest of Jerusalem which would be on the 1,010th day of the 2,300 days, placing their deaths in January 2015 according to the timetable I elaborated in other blogs. This also means the prophets (who I believe are Elijah and Moses, according to Gene Scott's teaching) would show up about a month and a half to two months before the Rapture, when you count back their 1,260 days of prophesying, or about early August of 2011 on my proposed timetable.

The earthquake of Revelation 11 will destroy a tenth of Jerusalem and 7,000 people, a figure consistent with the number of deaths that could occur in the event of a Temple Mount collapse. Concomitantly, the new Temple would survive the quake... and probably require some repairs, which in Hillelian fashion explains the seeming contradiction between two Jewish prophetic traditions that 1. the Messiah will not arrive until the Temple is built, and 2. he will commission the people to build the Temple when he arrives.

Another sign must apparently accompany the building of the Temple in the first place... the appearance of the red heifer. There is rumor of one having been found in March 2010 and being guarded closely by Jewish religious authorities. But, in order for construction of the Temple to even commence, the red heifer must be sacrificed on the Mount of Olives and its ashes saved for use in the Temple rites... without those ashes, there is no Temple service from what I understand of Jewish law and tradition. So, no red heifer, no sacrifice of it, no ashes, no rites, no reason to build a Temple. Look for it -- if they kill one atop the hill east of the Kidron valley from the Temple Mount and save the ashes, they're getting ready to start construction, and no destruction of the existing buildings on the Mount is necessary except for work that may need to be done in the Garden of El Qas.

Siting the Temple in Jerusalem

The following was sent to http://www.templeinstitute.org as a comment.

Is it true that the Temple cannot be placed on ground that was used for a pagan high place or for pagan sacrifices?

If that is the case, there is an outstanding allegation made by architect Tuvia Sagiv that the site of the Dome of the Rock is a former pagan high place, and in addition to this it's known that the Al Aqsa mosque was built over the Roman Temple of Jupiter. Sagiv's study of the geology of the area suggests that locating any remnant of either the First or Second Temples at the Dome or anywhere north of it would be very unlikely because the bedrock itself breaks through to the surface inside the Dome edifice. Historically, he argues that the wall surrounding the Temple grounds had to be raised to stop a nosy evil king from peering from his palace into the grounds; the sightlines required to substantiate this would have been broken by siting the Temple at the Dome or north of it, regardless of the height of the wall. In the southern location in the garden between the Dome and Al Aqsa, a low wall allows a sightline from that former ancient palace into the area, and a high wall prevents it, according to Sagiv.

So he suggests the likelihood of the Temple having been located in the garden of Al-Kas midway between the Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa. Now, when I looked at the aerial photo and mapped diagram you have on the Bird's Eye Guide, I noticed a strikingly similar outline of a rectangular area in the garden, to the southwest of the Bird's Eye Temple diagram, matching the outline of the Temple, Inner Court and Women's Court, and it looks like it would fit very neatly right between the two Muslim structures. This also puts the Holy of Holies much closer to the Western Wall, where it would lie on the other side just to the northeast.

Sagiv himself suggests the Fountain of Al-Kas is centered right about where the Holy of Holies once stood, but I think that if it were located there, it would make it more difficult to ensure access to a clean water supply for the whole Temple; only the high priest would have been able to get to it, and how would it get channeled to the laver of cleansing in the inner court? I think it's more likely that it was on the south side of the inner court where regular priests could get the water to the laver and the altar. The Holy of Holies from what I understand received the blood tokens of sacrifice, so it would have been unsuitable to have the spring feed right under it because of sanitation issues. (Think about where the well of a house usually is. Not under the kitchen or bathroom! Near an outside wall or outside of the house entirely.)

However, it seems to me that the broad points of Sagiv's hypothesis would solve some vexing problems, most notably with having to demolish all or parts of the Dome mosque and with siting the Temple on any former pagan temple or worship site. I was also impressed by his scientific evidence of massive foundations right underneath the garden, as shown in nocturnal infrared imagery of the site. You can view a synopsis of his theory included with the other two major theories of siting in the following link:

http://www.templemount.org/theories.html

And another analysis here:

http://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-jerusalem-temple-mount-threshing-floor.htm

So with qualifications, that's my two cents... what do you think?

Michael Savage still banned in Britain?

I sent the following to the Hon. Madam Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton:

"I'd like to know what the State Department is doing to lift the travel ban the United Kingdom has unfairly and possibly illegally imposed on radio talk show host Dr. Michael Savage, Ph.D. I'm told that under the new government of Prime Minister David Cameron, the UK still maintains a list on which this man, who has done nothing but exercise his freedom of speech, a right recognized both by the British unwritten Constitution and the US Bill of Rights, remains lumped in with terrorists and war criminals. Is speech that is controversial and disagreeable to be considered terrorism now? If that's so, how can anyone respect the rule of law under a Constitution in either country that specifies freedom of speech as a right? How can anyone even work for a government in either country that is so blatantly ignoring a law abiding citizen's right to speak his conscience directly to a nation and to the world? What is the United States' answer to this breach of a private citizen's freedoms by an ostensible allied nation that supposedly shares the values of liberty and fair play?"

Temple Mount may be in danger on Tisha B'Av 5770

The following was sent to the office of the Prime Minister of Israel:

It is my deep concern that there may be a lack of preparation for a possible total disaster on the Temple Mount and around the Western Wall. It seems to me there need to be systems in place to evacuate people rapidly in the event that the Mount really is unstable, and some precipitating event like an earthquake or careless or malevolent human activity causes it to collapse, God forbid during a holiday like Tisha B'Av or a Muslim feast day where many people are attracted to the Mount area.

I can't speak to expertise because I'm not an archaeologist or an engineer, I just see certain patterns in the way things are going. Ninth of Av in particular appears to be a very dangerous time historically to be around the Mount. A source called LightofZion.org points to the numerous instances in Jewish history where this particular date has figured in some disaster involving this site. Given that repetition of events, I should think it would be a very good time, if not to convince people to stay home, to at least be absolutely and fully prepared for the unimaginably worst to happen. My concern is tripled this year because of other circumstances such as increased threat of earthquakes connected to solar eclipses (such as the one coming up July 11, just 8 days before 9th of Av commences this year), continued reports of excavation, legal and not, and of rumors of impending war with Iran over its intentions of destroying Israel and acquiring nuclear weapons.

It should be noted that the Shiite sectarians very likely hold a grudge against the Sunni Muslims for their guerrillas having repeatedly and savagely attacked the third holiest shrine in all of Shia Islam -- the Mosque in the holy city of Najaf, Iraq. It is not out of the question that Shiite terrorists may try to avenge Najaf with an attack on the third holiest shrine in SUNNI Islam -- the Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa, in other words, the Temple Mount. Shiite-ruled Iran may indeed be looking for a pretext to destroy the Mount by air attack or clandestine means in the event of a war with Israel.

Anyway, please forward this message to the appropriate authorities and may G-d bless the nation of Israel and its people. Shalom.