22nd) The Magi & the angels
The Zodiac is a stable of animals and in the center of a stable is an animal's crib called a manger. The Magi would have recognized the Star of David as being a Jewish star. Is the Star of David a manger for the Zodiac Animals to raise a rejected human child? It is interesting that twin brothers, raised by wolves, founded the Roman Empire. The Magi would have seen their insights as angelic voices. Therefore, they had all the information they needed to travel to Jerusalem to speak to Herod. Note that the angel actually spoke the words "city of David".
In ancient times when a new star was seen it was an omen to the birth of a newborn king. This is probably why the Magi travel to the birth scene. But consider also that Julius Caesar did not set up the calendar himself. He had people working for him that were Magi that incorporated the culture's customs and traditions into the calendar. Who else was better qualified to incorporate (recognize) the Star of David in the calendar? Who is better qualified to have shown up on the precise date the Messiah was expected to be born? It is not a theory or hypothical that the Magi set up this calendar. I am not saying that the same Magi that set up the calendar were the same ones that visited the newborn Christ child. I would not bet the farm on them not being consulted on its formation.
Because of the way the New Testament is written we are suppose to reason according to certain ideas laid in the text. Once you realize that the Magi may have been semi-responsible for the Dawn of Christianity that reasoning process become somewhat ambiguous. For example: considering what was just written above, though the Magi would have incorporated the Star of David because it was Jewish, and therefore, was able to inferred the birth of a newborn king, they would also have recognized it as having to do with Bethlehem of Judea. But to put these nuances into the text of the New Testament it was necessary to say they spoke to Herods court. It is this Star of David that is incredulous. If it was any other design would the Magi have been able to say they had gone to Jerusalem to speak to King Herod? What else could have convinced the reader (convert) that it was a Jewish King about to be born? Yes, you can say that the New Testament text speaks of angels speaking to the Magi and I ask how do angels speak to man? Angels are pure thoughts from God. This dilemma lies in the Star of David being physically manifested into the calendar at the exact time of the Magi following a so-called star. When all the other pieces fall into place what are we to think? When the text records the angels warning the Magi not to return to King Herod it is obvious from the child's world's surroundings that he did not want the world or any part of it. That alone was enough information (angelic voices) for the Magi to know not to return to King Herod. What initiate would speak to an ignorant uninitiated who does not want to learn, unless of course he speak to him to learn the depth of the novitiates ignorance. A materialistic king (the individual id) would kill anything spiritual in order to survive. This is the killing of all spiritual ideas (children) under two years of age.
There are many layers to the text and to separate them is a Herculean task: equal to untying the Gordians Knot. As each layer is peeled away an understanding of the overall esoteric text become clearer.
23rd) The numerous Astronomical sightings
Note that this Star of David is a conceptual design and did not exist physically in the heavens to the point that the Magi were physically able to see it or follow it. If that were the case they would have had different groups of Magi wandering the desert of Arabia surrounding the dozen years of Christ's birth. It is as if every couple of years a spectacular event was taking place in the heavens. There were not enough oases in the desert to support the multitude of caravans needed to keep track of such heavenly events. There would have been dozens of caravans crisscrossing the deserts of Arabia. These caravans treks would have been the industry of the day (I could not help making light of this nuance).
24th) The Magi's diagram of the Star of David
The Magi had a diagram on a piece of paper or Zodiac chart. Was this Star of David serendipitously placed into the calendar? No, it was not. It had to be a deliberate act by the Roman Senate. Note the numbers of the four months with 30-days: 1, 3, 6, and 8. This is another reason why February had to have a day removed from it. If it were allowed to retain the 30-days in leap year it would have thrown doubt on the geometrical configuration of the Star of David that appeared in the calendar.
25th) Bethlehem of Judea
Bethlehem of Judea sits at 31.68 North Latitude. Is it a coincidence that this town that gave birth to the Messiah sits on a location where its numbers are transposed from the calendar astrological months with those same four numbers creating a Star of David?
26th) Lord Jesus Christ
Get a hold of Bonnie Gaunt's works where she shows what this number 3168 means mathematically and this author knew nothing of my discovery in the calendar. She was working independently. She takes the phase Lord Jesus Christ and breaks it down numerically to 3168. She also takes this number to mean other things in relations to the measurements of the earth and the distance from the sun. The point is that I don't understand everything she writes but those things that she has hard evidence on such as the numerical coding of Bible words and totaling them up is something that can not be dismissed. Neither can the location of Bethlehem of Judea be dismissed which she also deals with.
27th) 2-Year Period
Now that we have the evidence of the calendar year to back up exactly what the Magi saw we can see that 2-year (Herod's killing the children) from January 1st 8 BC is January 1st 6 BC. Therefore, the circumcision date for Christ had to be January 1st, 6 BC and the birth date of Christ had to be December 25th 7 BC.
28th) The Motif of 38-Years
Remember I mentioned above about not knowing whether John was born in a leap year or not. Well, 38-years happens to be one complete Lunar Cycle. This is a Solar & Lunar calendar interface. The #38 is quite prominent in the Bible. The man that went down into the pool of Bethesda after 38-years is one such example. Isaac was born and his mother Sarah dies 38-years later and Abraham dies 38-years after his wife. Notice that at the end of the 38-years of the calendar the four months with 30-days were introduce into the signs: 1, 3, 6, 8: Now look at Abraham's families. It may well be that this 38-year period was meant to point back to Abraham families. This is because when you total Abraham's two families:
243 = Abram before it was changed to Abraham
208 = Hagar
451 = Ishmael
902 = Total
248 = Abraham
505 = Sarah (princess) after she discards her old name Sarai (contention)
208 = Isaac
961 = Total
Grand Total = 1863, which is a transposition of the numbers 1, 3, 6, 8.
Another reason to mention Abraham is because Luke begins his gospel by writing a salutation to Theophilus, which is interpreted as "friend of God". In the Old Testament Abraham is known as a "friend of God". Isn't it interesting that Luke begins his gospel to Theophilus and his first two chapter are on the six points of the conceptions, births, and circumcision of both John the Baptist and Jesus Christ and the grand finale of these stories is learning of the Star of David that gives off the same four digits as his two families. It is too much to expect anyone to believe that this is merely coincidental. There are just too many coincidences.
29th) John the Baptist's Leaps in the Womb & the Leap Year
Now John could not have been born in June of the 39th year. Since the Star of David first appears, January 1st 8 BC (the beginning of the 39th year), there was no time for him to be conceived. Neither was there time for all the new changes in the calendar to take place. So John the Baptist being conceived on October 1st 8 BC was timely. In fact it is the earliest possible date after the Star of David appeared, in the calendar, for John to have been conceived. The people that set this system up economized everything to the point that error was not possible if you think about the events correctly.
Notice that when John was conceived on October 1st 8 BC, one year before that same date would have been September 31st. So the day taken out of September and given to October on that year was the last change that had to take place that would have influenced the outcome of our calculations. The next change is merely incidental to completing all the changes of the calendar that year. November gives up it's 31's day to December. Nothing important takes place in those last two months and therefore the outcome of the last 61 days of the year had no effect on what date John the Baptist would be conceived.
It is the 39th-year of the calendar and as John is carried in the womb of his mother she goes through the New Year round to February, March, to April 1st when the child: John, leaps in her womb. Now consider how advantageously this all is: it is now the 40th year of the calendar making it a leap year. The author seems to make puns out of the points they are trying to make. It may well be that the reason that these puns are incorporated into the text is to force us to suspend our disbelief that the gospel writers would not do it.
30th) Malachi 4:5; Prophesizing Elijah
This is not the only evidence of John being born in the 39th year because one has to consider the prophesy about Elijah in the 39th Book of the Old Testament: Malachi 4:5; "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord". Jesus Christ tells us that John the Baptist is Elijah. Are we to believe that Elijah is mentioned in the 39th book of the Old Testament and John is conceived in the 39th year of the new calendar and it is all a coincidence?
31st) Jesus Christ is born on time
Then you must consider that since Jesus is conceived and born in the 40th-year of the calendar isn't it too much of a coincidence that he is first mentioned in the 40th Book of the Bible: Matthew's 1st chapter. It is the little nuances like this that adds flavor to the mystical manner in which the Christian story was set up. This in no way negates the spirituality of the sacred scriptures. In fact these nuances should enhance the validity of what the sacred scriptures are saying.
32nd) Mathematics, John's Conception, Jesus Christ's birth & death
Another beautiful consideration for this paper, another BC coin if you will, and by no means is this all the evidence on this point concerning the Birth of Christ, concerns the structure of the Christian Catholic Bible in relationship to the conception of John the Baptist, and the birth and death of Christ.
39 Books in the Old Testament
07 Books in the Apocrypha
27 Books in the New Testament
39th year of the calendar (Oct. 1st 8 BC) John the Baptist is conceived
07 BC Jesus Christ is conceived and born
27 AD Jesus Christ is crucified at the age of 33 years of age.
Do you really think that it all maps out like this coincidentally?
33rd) The proximity of the birth of Christ to the change of the calendar
This is an extremely tight knit argument concerning the birth of Christ. As you can see it all hinges upon the change of the calendar on January 1st 8 BC, which produced the Star of David. When I initially came across this piece of information concerning the Star of David I knew I had to validate many questions that came to mind. The closeness of the proximity of the change of the calendar (and those changes producing the Star of David) in relationship to the birth of Christ was just too much to summarily dismiss. I had to ask myself the questions that are seemingly ambiguous from the New Testament.
Actually there is no way to shake this argument. There are just too many pieces that fit together, like a jigsaw puzzle, concerning the two Nativity accounts (plus John's) in the New Testament. I have never seen any thesis on the birth of Christ that has successfully married both (I should say three) Nativity accounts into one. Yet, my argument does accomplish that feat.
34th) Dante Alighieri & La Divina Commedia
In concluding this portion of this paper let me point out that there is much that other writers have written from an esoteric point of view that backs up this paper. My work "THE CONQUEST OF GENESIS" (published April 1998) demonstrates that Dante Alighieri who wrote "La Divina Commedia" used this same mathematical data concerning the 38-years (38 x 365.242199 + 354 = 14,233: verses in La Divina Commedia) and the Star of David to pattern his mathematical knowledge esoterically. (see below diagram of "Dante's Zodiac Cycle" with Star of David)
35th) Mathematics & the First Chapter of Genesis
In addition to the above the first chapter of Genesis has an extraordinary amount of data on the issue of the birth of Christ though to read that chapter you would not believe so. When the Hebrew words are counted and analyzed a great deal concerning the birth of Christ is realized. In fact the evidence that comes out of the first word of Genesis: Bereshith, has to be the root to the foundations of Christianity. It is the root to all that has been discussed above. In fact there are three Nativity stories out of the four gospels. Saint John's account is sadly overlooked and is the most important account of all. But since it deals with the interpretation of the first word of Genesis I will deal with it below. Suffice to say that this paper has produced enough of evidence, up to this point, to demonstrate that Christ was born on December 25th.
36th) Unimpeachable historical sources
I know that most orthodox believers in the Christian faith will reel at such an interpretation though it is as literal in interpreting the Old & New Testament texts as you can get. Nobody has come at this question, concerning the Birth of Christ, from this perspective before. Note how I brought all the incongruities of the New Testament texts together without a chance of their being a contradiction. Show me one academic, in the entire world that can do the same with his theories and interpretations. What I do with my research, and have tried to demonstrate it above, is to take unimpeachable sources of so-called history and shine its light on the New Testament textual wording concerning the Nativity story. What I find is an extraordinary collaboration of the facts.
As we continue below in PART #2 we have to pay close attention to the construction of the first word of Genesis: Bereshith. Which will be discussed much more clearly then this paragraph. Bereshith begins with two #2s (Beth & Resh). Then Aleph (1), then Shin (3), and finally Yud (1), & Tav (4). These all will become important in understanding the birth of Christ. The 38-years of the calendar, from Julius Caesar introducing it - to the Roman Senate changing it in 8 BC, represents the letter Beth at the beginning of Bereshith. The 2-years after that to January 1st 6 BC represents the Resh (2nd letter of Bereshith), the birth of Christ represents Aleph in Bereshith, and the ministry of Christ represents Shin (Christ creating man into his own image = forgiveness of sin). Finally his crucifixion and death on the cross (rejected by the Jews) is "the Spirit of Elohym hovering over the face of the waters (Gen. 1:2;)", which is Yud (1), and Tav (4) in the word Bereshith. The Dawn of Christianity is the utterance of the first letter of Bereshith: Beth.
This above paragraph is a thumbnail sketch of the dawn of Christianity. It shows us where the mythos of Christianity came from. Below in PART #2 we will enter into these secrets and mysteries of Genesis.