Every December, the question returns with predictable force: Was Yeshua really born on December 25? A widely shared video (circulating again this year) promises an answer “hiding in plain sight” in seven clues—census logistics, shepherds in the fields, the star, Herod, Zechariah’s priestly course, Tabernacles, and the start of Yeshua’s ministry.
As Messianic Jews, we share this instinct. We want the story to “lock” into the mo‘adim, the appointed times; we hear John’s claim that the Word “tabernacled” among us (John 1:14) and we instinctively think of Sukkot – the Feast of Tabernacles. There is nothing wrong with letting the feasts form our imagination. The problem comes when we turn typology into a timetable, and devotion into a date.
Historical scholarship—Jewish, Christian, and secular—does not yield a “true date” of Yeshua’s birth in the sense the video claims. It can, at best, offer a probable range of years and then confess (with some humility) that the month and day are not recoverable from our sources.
What we can say with some confidence: the year is a range
Most reconstructions begin where Matthew begins: “in the days of Herod the king.” (Matthew 2:1). That pushes us into the final years of Herod the Great. A long-standing scholarly majority places Herod’s death in 4 BCE, and in that case Yeshua’ birth must be earlier (often placed roughly 6–4 BCE, depending on how one correlates other data).
But even here, caution is warranted. The date of Herod’s death is debated, with a serious minority arguing for 1 BCE, which (if adopted) shifts the window.
So the first “hidden clue” the video treats as settled (“Herod died in 4 BC, therefore…”) is already sitting on contested ground.
The census and the shepherds: plausible impressions, not chronological proof
The video’s opening move is rhetorical: “The Romans wouldn’t do a winter census; therefore Yeshua wasn’t born in winter.” Yet Luke’s census note is one of the most contested chronological features in the infancy narratives. There is ongoing debate over what Luke is doing historically and literarily with the Quirinius reference, and recent journal work argues Luke’s census motif may be doing theological signalling as much as (or more than) administrative dating.
Likewise, “shepherds in the fields” is regularly pressed into service as if it were a weather report. But as Andrew Steinmann has recently argued in detail, several favourite “data points” (including appeals to shepherding practice and priestly-course math) simply cannot bear the weight placed upon them when people try to deduce a specific birth date from them.
None of this means the video’s intentions are wicked or foolish. It means they are overconfident. The move from “December is unlikely” to “therefore September/October is proved” is a leap over a chasm of assumptions.
The priestly courses: a clock with missing gears
The most “technical” part of the video is the claim that Zechariah’s division (Abijah) (Luke 1:5) lets us calculate John’s conception in June, then Yeshua’s conception six months later, then Yeshua’s birth nine months after that—landing neatly in September/October, conveniently near Sukkot.
This is attractive because it feels mathematical. But the “math” depends on what we do not have: a securely reconstructible priestly rotation for a particular year, mapped cleanly onto the calendar, with no disruptions and no uncertainties. This is precisely the kind of argument Steinmann cautions against: it sounds like precision, but it is precision purchased on credit. To reconcile Jewish calendars (Pharisees, Sadducees, Josephus, etc) is a major challenge for Jewish and Christian scholars.
“Tabernacled among us”: glorious theology, not a hidden timestamp
Here the video is at its most homiletically compelling: John 1:14 says the Word became flesh and “dwelt” among us—eskēnōsen, “tabernacled.” Surely, then, Yeshua was born at Sukkot?
As proclamation, this sings. As proof, it fails. John is not writing a calendar; he is announcing that the God of Israel has pitched his tent in the midst of his people in the Messiah. The word is chosen for theological density, not because John is whispering a date to readers willing to do enough arithmetic.
In other words: Sukkot is a beautiful lens for the incarnation. It is not a reliable anchor for chronology.
December 25 and Sol Invictus: the “pagan takeover” story is too neat
The video repeats the common claim: the idea that the date of December 25 for Christmas was intentionally chosen to overwrite or appropriate the Roman festival of Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the Unconquered Sun). This is a subject of historical debate, with many modern scholars arguing against it
Yes, the Chronography of 354 is a key witness for what Rome was marking in late antiquity, including December 25 traditions.
But the relationship between Christian dating and solar festivals is not a simple one-way “replacement.” Steven Hijmans has argued that the evidential basis for the popular “Sol Invictus → Christmas” storyline is often thinner than people assume.
And C. Philipp E. Nothaft has shown that early Christian calendrical reasoning (computistical traditions and symbolic chronologies) is part of the story—so that “pagan borrowing” is not the only, nor necessarily the best, explanation.
So where does that leave us?
A Messianic Jewish way of holding the question
We can say, without embarrassment: the New Testament does not tell us the date, and responsible history cannot fabricate what the sources do not give.
We can also say: it is entirely possible that Yeshua was born in the autumn. It is also possible he was not. The point is not to banish the question, but to refuse false certainty. The real issue is not ‘when was he born?’ but ‘is he truly the Messiah?’
And we can say something more Jewish still: the feasts are not primarily an escape-room puzzle. They are God’s gift of time—training Israel (and through Israel, the nations) to inhabit the world as worship. If Sukkot helps you adore the mystery that God has drawn near and “camped” among us in Yeshua, then receive that as grace. Just don’t turn it into an internet-proof that condemns other believers for celebrating on December 25.
Because the deepest “precision” here is not the date, but the faithfulness: “When the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4). Fullness is not the same thing as a timestamp.
English: Happy Christmas – the Feast of the Birth of the Messiah Yeshua!
חַג שָׂמֵחַ לְחַג הוּלֶדֶת הַמָּשִׁיחַ יֵשׁוּעַ!
Chag sameach le-chag huledet ha-Mashiach Yeshua!
Prayer
God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, give us love for truth without pride, and zeal without the need to win. Teach us to honour your appointed times without forcing them to say what you have not said. Let the light of Messiah shine in our homes this season—whenever we mark it—and make us gentle witnesses to the One who came near. Amen.
Hebrew
אָבִינוּ מַלְכֵּנוּ, תֵּן לָנוּ חָכְמָה וַעֲנָוָה; אֱמֶת בְּלֹא גַּאֲוָה, וּקִנְאָה לְשִׁמְךָ בְּלֹא מַחֲלוֹקֶת. לַמְּדֵנוּ לְכַבֵּד אֶת מוֹעֲדֶיךָ בְּלִי לְהוֹסִיף מַה שֶּׁלֹּא אָמַרְתָּ. הָאֵר בָּנוּ אוֹר הַמָּשִׁיחַ וַעֲשֵׂנוּ עֵדִים עֲנָוִים לְעִמָּנוּ אֵל. אָמֵן.
Transliteration
Avinu Malkeinu, ten lanu chochmah va’anavah; emet b’lo ga’avah, u’qin’ah l’shimkha b’lo machaloket. Lamdenu l’chabed et mo’adeikha b’li l’hosif mah she-lo amarta. Ha’er banu or haMashiach, v’aseinu edim anavim l’Imanu El. Amen.
References for further reading
https://hebrew4christians.com/Holidays/Winter_Holidays/Christmas/christmas.html
https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/display/document/obo-9780195393361/obo-9780195393361-0251.xml
Marshak, Adam Kolman. The Many Faces of Herod the Great. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2015.
- P. M. Bernegger, “Affirmation of Herod’s Death in 4 B.C.” Journal of Theological Studies 34.2 (1983).
- https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Calendar_and_Chronology_Jewish_and_Chris.html?id=6j-fDxGEeGIC
- Andrew E. Steinmann, “Information in the Gospels That Cannot Be Used to Determine the Date of Jesus’s Birth.” JETS 67.3 (2024): 493–504.
- T. C. Schmidt, discussion of December 25 traditions and the Chronography of 354 evidence (PDF version circulating).
- Steven Hijmans, “Sol Invictus, the Winter Solstice, and the Origins of Christmas.”
- C. Philipp E. Nothaft, “The Origins of the Christmas Date” (and related work/interviews on early Christian chronology).
