Young Jesus Time Line

[ctkrcia]

I have a question on the time line of the young Jesus. According to scripture,

1. How long from His birth until the visit from the wise men?
2. How long from the visit to the exile into Egypt?
3. How long from the exile to the settling in Nazareth?
4. How long from settling in Nazareth until the finding in the temple?

Yesterday’s Gospel reading mentioned that the wise men “…entered the house.” Does that mean the holy family was not in the stable when the wise men arrived?

Given that Herod ordered the death of all males two years old and younger, does that mean that Jesus could have been up to two years old at the time of the exile?

Just curious.

 

[ckempston]

I have a question on the time line of the young Jesus. According to scripture,

1. How long from His birth until the visit from the wise men?
2. How long from the visit to the exile into Egypt?
3. How long from the exile to the settling in Nazareth?
4. How long from settling in Nazareth until the finding in the temple?

Yesterday’s Gospel reading mentioned that the wise men “…entered the house.” Does that mean the holy family was not in the stable when the wise men arrived?

Given that Herod ordered the death of all males two years old and younger, does that mean that Jesus could have been up to two years old at the time of the exile?

Just curious.

I don’t think those answers are clear in scripture. They certainly weren’t in a stable as we think of it in modern times. A first-century Jewish household consisted of several sections - an elevated area where pretty much everything happened (think family room), a lower area near the door where animals would come in at night, and a separate room for hospitality near the back (Kataluma - this is the same word used in Luke 22/Mark14 for where the Last Supper was eaten), which is what the New Testament word for “inn” means.

There was no room in this “spare room,” which was probably in a relative’s household, and Joseph convinced the family to let them stay in the area with the animals, or possibly in the common area and Jesus was simply laid in the indentation at the edge of the floor that would have been used for a troth. This is what a manger usually was - an indentation in the floor near a ledge where hay would be placed for animals, or sometimes a separate carved stone or mold that resembles a modern horse troth. The traditional imagery we have has some glaring errors.

Luke does use a word for “inn” which DOES mean what we think of today, and that word is Pandocheion. This occurs in Luke 10 where the good Samaritan leaves the beaten man.

 

[laszlo]

The probable time line is:

• birth
• shepherds
• circumcision (8th day after birth)
• presentation in the Temple (40th day after birth)
• wise men visit in Bethlehem anytime after that
• flee to Egypt (immediately after the wise men)
• Blessed innocents (below 2 years old)
• Death of Herod (probably 4BC)
• return from Egypt to Nazareth instead of the previous domicile in Judea

 

[SMHW]

I have also heard it suggested that Jesus could have been staying in the “stable” portion of a family home. Tradition(little “t”) seems to tell us otherwise but I’m not sure how far back that tradition goes. Those in the greater Jerusalem area would be unlikely to have a great deal of wood to use so our current idea of the wooden manger is not very likely. In fact, while we say Joseph was a “carpenter”, he was probably more likely to be something akin to a day laborer who specialized in construction work. There was probably a fair amount of construction going on due to the Romans.

Scripture is also not clear about how long it took for the Magi to visit Jesus. Since Herod saw fit to have all male children up until about two years of age killed it would be reasonable to believe that Jesus would have been over a year old by the time the Magi were able to see him. It would be reasonable to think that if Jesus’ family had decided to stay in the Bethlehem area (perhaps due to Roman construction projects in that area?) that they would be staying in better quarters than they did when Jesus was born.

 

[GEddie]

The “historical” location of the stable in Bethlehem is not a wooden barn but a grotto or small cavern in the stone. Such features are ubiquitous in Israel and were used extensively by the people, since wood for construction was scarce. This site is now under the 4th-century Basilica of the Nativity in Bethlehem.

Back to the OP: It is likely that our LORD was 2 years old when the wise-men came, since King Herod responded to them by ordering the death of boys 2 years old or less. Since Herod died in 4BC, this resulted in the estimated birth-year of our LORD as 6BC. (AIUI, the discrepancy concerning our LORD’s birth during “BC” results from an early miscalculation of the year of King Herod’s death.)

Young Jewish males were presented in the Temple when 12 years old; counting from 6BC, this would be in AD6. Beyond that, we hear nothing of HIS life in the Gospels until HIS young adulthood, in AD30 or 31.

God Bless and ICXC NIKA.

 

[ckempston]

I have also heard it suggested that Jesus could have been staying in the “stable” portion of a family home. Tradition(little “t”) seems to tell us otherwise but I’m not sure how far back that tradition goes. Those in the greater Jerusalem area would be unlikely to have a great deal of wood to use so our current idea of the wooden manger is not very likely. In fact, while we say Joseph was a “carpenter”, he was probably more likely to be something akin to a day laborer who specialized in construction work. There was probably a fair amount of construction going on due to the Romans.

Scripture is also not clear about how long it took for the Magi to visit Jesus. Since Herod saw fit to have all male children up until about two years of age killed it would be reasonable to believe that Jesus would have been over a year old by the time the Magi were able to see him. It would be reasonable to think that if Jesus’ family had decided to stay in the Bethlehem area (perhaps due to Roman construction projects in that area?) that they would be staying in better quarters than they did when Jesus was born.

I think it’s unlikely that the Magi had any significant length of time between the birth of Jesus and their visit to him. I’d say he was still surely in the same place as the “manger” for all of the visits.

After their purification according to the Law (which would have been 8 days), they returned to Nazareth (Matt 2:39); the Magi visited while they were still in Bethlehem, meaning he was still a newborn. The passage of time was likely, in my opinion, between the Magi leaving and Herod realizing he had been tricked. Why all the kids under 2? Herod was known to be a sick individual, so there’s no reason to expect he acted “rationally,” if killing infants of any age can be called rational.

 

[GEddie]

I think it’s unlikely that the Magi had any significant length of time between the birth of Jesus and their visit to him. I’d say he was still surely in the same place as the “manger” for all of the visits.

Then the star appeared before he was even conceived? It would have taken months or years before the wise-men reached HIM, especially if they were coming from Persia/Iran or beyond; and they apparently got lost, since they asked Herod for directions.

After their purification according to the Law (which would have been 8 days), they returned to Nazareth (Matt 2:39); the Magi visited while they were still in Bethlehem, meaning he was still a newborn. The passage of time was likely, in my opinion, between the Magi leaving and Herod realizing he had been tricked. Why all the kids under 2? Herod was known to be a sick individual, so there’s no reason to expect he acted “rationally,” if killing infants of any age can be called rational.

In which case a whole lot of young people and legislators in our world are irrational.

ICXC NIKA

 

[ckempston]

Then the star appeared before he was even conceived? It would have taken months or years before the wise-men reached HIM, especially if they were coming from Persia/Iran or beyond; and they apparently got lost, since they asked Herod for directions.

Why would the star need to appear before he was conceived? I’m certainly open to other interpretations, but the Magi visiting in Nazareth seems unlikely and a reading that must be forced on the text. They were looking for him in Bethlehem, and on their return trip, they took “another route” to avoid Herod. Hardly necessary coming from Nazareth, which is far to the North of Jerusalem, unlike Bethlehem, which is close by.

The Magi came from the East, which is anywhere from the Arabian Peninsula to Persia; we have no idea how far they came following the “star.” Let’s say anywhere from 200 - 800 miles. But even with that long range you’re talking 15 to 50 or so travel days (assuming 15 miles a day, which is fairly conservative). Hardly a “years long” journey. Months? Possibly. Years? Not likely.

Reconciling the Matthew and Luke accounts, it seems most likely that Jesus was visited by both the Shepherds, the Magi, and made his visit to the Temple for ceremonial cleansing within 40 days of his birth. It’s quite difficult to fit the Magi in anywhere else because Luke indicates they flee to Egypt directly after fulfilling their legal requirements.

In which case a whole lot of young people and legislators in our world are irrational.

ICXC NIKA

Ok. Not sure what your point is here, but I’d agree.

 

[japhy]

Luke uses the Greek word “brephos” to refer to Jesus in Luke 2… until verse 40, when he uses “paidon”: “The child {paidon} continued to grow and become strong, increasing in wisdom; and the grace of God was upon Him.”

Matthew uses the word “paidon” to describe Jesus in Matthew 2; he never uses the word “brephos”. That has led some commentators and exegetes to infer that Jesus was older than He was in the events of the first half of Luke 2.

 

[ckempston]

Luke uses the Greek word “brephos” to refer to Jesus in Luke 2… until verse 40, when he uses “paidon”: “The child {paidon} continued to grow and become strong, increasing in wisdom; and the grace of God was upon Him.”

Matthew uses the word “paidon” to describe Jesus in Matthew 2; he never uses the word “brephos”. That has led some commentators and exegetes to infer that Jesus was older than He was in the events of the first half of Luke 2.

I’m sorry that’s incorrect, and a very poor inference on the part of those commentators. Luke also uses “paidon” to refer to both John and Jesus as infants; John when he is circumcised on the 8th day:

1:59 And it happened that on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child (paidon), and they were going to call him Zacharias, after his father.

And Jesus when he is presented at the Temple (which he would have been about a month old):

2:27 And he came in the Spirit into the temple; and when the parents brought in the child (paidon) Jesus, to carry out for Him the custom of the Law,

It simply does not follow that Matthew’s use of brephos supports a later timeline. Those commentator and exegetes who conclude this are working on incomplete information, are mistakenly committing a fallacy, or they are being deliberately deceptive. Any way you cut it, the conclusion is not supported by the facts.

 

[japhy]

I’m sorry that’s incorrect, and a very poor inference on the part of those commentators. Luke also uses “paidon” to refer to both John and Jesus as infants; John when he is circumcised on the 8th day

My apologies. I missed the uses of paidon in Luke 1:59 and 2:27.

 

[ckempston]

My apologies. I missed the uses of paidon in Luke 1:59 and 2:27.

studylight.org/isb has an interlinear Bible and a Lexicon at studylight.org/lex/ where you can quickly fact check these claims. It’s really easy to find every use of a particular word using that Lexicon.

 

[laszlo]

Here is an interesting article about the manger

pas.rochester.edu/~tim/study/Why%20a%20manger.pdf

The point is that the sacrificial lambs for the Temple were raised in Bethlehem. After birth the lamb was placed into a manger. Joseph found place in that stable and Jesus was placed to that special manger made for the sacrificial lambs

If true than definitely explains the symbolism of the manger

 

[patrick457]

I have a question on the time line of the young Jesus. According to scripture,

1. How long from His birth until the visit from the wise men?
2. How long from the visit to the exile into Egypt?
3. How long from the exile to the settling in Nazareth?
4. How long from settling in Nazareth until the finding in the temple?

If I’m going to be brutally honest, the answer to questions 1~4 would be, “we don’t know,” because frankly, even the Gospels don’t tell us much.

Yesterday’s Gospel reading mentioned that the wise men “…entered the house.” Does that mean the holy family was not in the stable when the wise men arrived?

An interesting fact is that, in those days ‘stables’ weren’t edifices that were totally separate from the house, like modern-day barns. People in those days either kept their animals inside their houses, which would then have two storeys, with the upper level serving as the family’s living quarters (the animals are below), or employed something natural (say, a cave) as a holding place for their livestock, and built their houses beside, in front of, over or near it.

Given that Herod ordered the death of all males two years old and younger, does that mean that Jesus could have been up to two years old at the time of the exile?

Just curious.

Maybe.

 

[steve53]

from another thread:

It all depends on when Jesus was born, a subject of no small contention.

I will give you a theory from Hagan’s “Passover”.

To make a long story short, Jesus was born in 12 B.C., close to the time of the passage of Halley’s Comet, and born somewhere close to Bethlehem. The comet was a tremendously spectacular celestial event. This prompted the “wise men” to come to Herod looking for a new-born King, and so the infanticide began.

Josephs and his family had to flee to Egypt in either 12, 11, or 10 B.C.

When Herod the Great died in 4 B.C., Joseph ventured to return back to Judea. There, he found Herod’s son Archelaus ruling, and was just as cruel and on the lookout for the Messiah as Herod had been. Joseph and his family moved north to Nazareth, in the territory of Herod Antipas. Antipas had a much milder disposition, and, besides, he was building a capital city at nearby Sepphoris, so there was work to be had.

The enrollment period of A.D. 6 occurred when Archelaus was removed by Augustus, and his kingdom was transformed into a Roman province. A census had to be taken so Augustus knew what he had. So Joseph and Mary had to return to be counted, and in Bethlehem Mary had a later child, possibly the future James the Just. The author of Luke mixed up the two stories, or was told them incorrectly by his sources.

So Jesus lived in Egypt for probably six or seven years before going to Nazareth.

As for Jesus impressing the Priests in the Temple, that probably did not occur, according to Hagan. Luke mistakenly included a story from the life of Flavius Josephus, or used a popular legend that might have existed about a child-priest prodigy that was floating around at the time.

The author of Luke and Flavius Josephus were likely in Rome at the same time, in A.D. 63, which could explain how the mix-up occurred.

But many don’t agree with this.

 

[NHInsider]

Reconciling the Matthew and Luke accounts, it seems most likely that Jesus was visited by both the Shepherds, the Magi, and made his visit to the Temple for ceremonial cleansing within 40 days of his birth. It’s quite difficult to fit the Magi in anywhere else because Luke indicates they flee to Egypt directly after fulfilling their legal requirements.

?? Luke tells us about the Presentation, but not the Flight into Egypt. Matthew tells us about the Flight but not the Presentation. Not sure what you meant here.

Another factor no one has mentioned yet is that women would not have travelled after childbirth if there was any way to avoid it - if Joseph had family in Bethlehem, the Holy Family probably would have remained with them for 6 months or so. And it’s not difficult to imagine that if Joseph got work on a particular project, they might have intended to remain there until it ended - and so to have received the Magi there, and gone from there to Egypt.

 

[ckempston]

?? Luke tells us about the Presentation, but not the Flight into Egypt. Matthew tells us about the Flight but not the Presentation. Not sure what you meant here.

Another factor no one has mentioned yet is that women would not have travelled after childbirth if there was any way to avoid it - if Joseph had family in Bethlehem, the Holy Family probably would have remained with them for 6 months or so. And it’s not difficult to imagine that if Joseph got work on a particular project, they might have intended to remain there until it ended - and so to have received the Magi there, and gone from there to Egypt.

Not sure what you mean about not knowing what I mean. You have to take the Matthew and Luke accounts and put them into one timeline. I believe the most sensible explanation is the one I have given, though the others are not impossible. I’m not going on “imagining” anything, but on what facts the texts provide us.

 

[NHInsider]

Not sure what you mean about not knowing what I mean. You have to take the Matthew and Luke accounts and put them into one timeline. I believe the most sensible explanation is the one I have given, though the others are not impossible. I’m not going on “imagining” anything, but on what facts the texts provide us.

okay, but what you wrote was

Luke indicates they flee to Egypt directly after fulfilling their legal requirements.

So that’s why I was confused.

 

[ckempston]

okay, but what you wrote was

So that’s why I was confused.

I don’t follow. Sorry. Must be experiencing mental block or something.

 

[ckempston]

okay, but what you wrote was

So that’s why I was confused.

Oh, I realize what you mean now. Yeah, that was worded poorly. Was a bit careless because in my mind I had the two accounts combined. What I meant was that Luke’s narrative indicates that they left Bethlehem immediately after fulfilling their legal requirements. He says they went to Galilee, which leaves very little room to fit the flight to Egypt - basically between Luke 2:38-41. The flight to Egypt could fit in before they returned to Nazareth, or after returning and learning that Herod was trying to kill Jesus. My main point has been where to place the shepherds and the Magi, which I personally think the best explanation is basically when Jesus was a newborn up to about 2 months. The main difficulty there is why Herod chooses to kill children under the age of 2. I gave what I thought was a decent explanation for that: Herod was crazy and we’re not sure how long it took him to realize he had been tricked.

Honestly, I don’t think it matters from a practical standpoint to any Christians, Catholic or otherwise. I just think it’s interesting to think about and try to put it all together.