Problems with a Sukkot birth for Yeshua

Published by Rob Skiba November 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM

The signs for the Alpha and Omega were set in motion from the Beginning to the End…

Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Revelation 12:

1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

Please watch this video by Dr. Michael Heiser concerning the above sign in the heavens:

Those who teach the Sukkot birth of Yeshua, totally ignore the sign of Rev. 12:1-2, which was PERFECTLY fulfilled on Sept. 11, 3BC under a new moon (as opposed to a full moon), which indicates Tishri 1 and the Feast of Trumpets – a time that also happens to be the day when kings were coronated. So, how fitting that Yeshua, the King of kings and Lord of lords should be born on a day when both Heaven and Earth would be sounding trumpets (shofars) in joyous celebration? Beyond this, I have the following problems with the idea of Him being born on Sukkot and circumcised on the 8th “Great Day”.

The commandment is for all males to be in Jerusalem for Sukkot:

Exodus 34:23 Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before the Lord God, the God of Israel.

Deut. 16:16 Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the Lord thy God in the place which he shall choose {which was Jerusalem}; in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles: and they shall not appear before the Lord empty:

Thus, as males Joseph and baby Yeshua would have been in violation of that commandment. This would not be a good way for the “sinLESS” Lamb to have started out. Any notion that Joseph “appeared before YHWH” in Jerusalem BEFORE going to Bethlehem is based on PURE speculation. Luke clearly states that they arrived there AFTER Yeshua’s birth and the time of Mary’s uncleanness:

Leviticus 12: 

1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.

3 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.

And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.

Luke 2: 22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses WERE ACCOMPLISHED, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;23 (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;) 24 And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.

Now, I will say that the idea of Joseph merely making an “appearance” in Jerusalem is interesting, though Scripture is completely silent in this regard (which would seem to be a peculiar thing if they indeed were attending Sukkot). So, I prefer not to base beliefs/doctrines/ideas on Biblical silence and using eisegesis (inserting ideas into the text not found there) when coming to my conclusions.

Also, the argument that He “Tabernacled among us” often used for a Sukkot birth doesn’t work either, as in order to comply with Lev. 12, Mary and Yeshua would NOT have been allowed to be “in the camp” (of temporary dwellings) as she was unclean. Along similar lines, consider what has to say about this:

LUKE 2: c 21 And when eight days [ Genesis 17:12 ] were fulfilled for circumcising him [The rite was doubtless performed by Joseph. By this rite Jesus was “made like unto his brethren” ( Hebrews 2:16 Hebrews 2:17 ); that is, he became a member of the covenant nation, and became a debtor to the law– Galatians 5:3 ], his name was called JESUS [see Luke 1:59 ], which was so called by the angel before he was conceived in the womb. [ Luke 1:31 .]

  22 And when the days of their purification according to the law of Moses were fulfilled [Purification took place on the fortieth day after the nativity in the case of males, and eighty days in the case of females ( Leviticus 12:1-5 ). Until it was performed the mother was not permitted to go to the temple, take part in any public service, or even to leave her house. It seems that the members of her family were also ceremonially unclean, because they came in daily contact with her], they brought him up to Jerusalem [to the temple], to present him to the Lord [When God slew the firstborn of Egypt he spared the firstborn of Israel. For this reason all the firstborn of Israel were regarded as being peculiarly the Lord’s ( Exodus 12:29 Exodus 12:30 ; 13:2 ); and the firstborn male child of each family had to be redeemed with money ( Exodus 13:11-15 ; Numbers 18:15 Numbers 18:16 ). Originally the firstborn or eldest son was priest of the household after his father’s death; but God chose the Levites to serve in his sanctuary in the place of these firstborn or household priests ( Numbers 3:11-13 ; 8:14-19 ); but this choosing did not annul the statute which required the payment of redemption money. The redemption money for a male was five shekels of the sanctuary, or about $3.75– Leviticus 27:6 ]

Whereas, if He was born on the day kings are coronated (Feast of Trumpets) as declared by the signs in the Heavens in accordance with Rev. 12, then the initial time of Mary’s time of purification would have ended 7 days later and 2 days before the Day of Atonement, they would have been able to have baby Yeshua circumcised.

==============CORRECTION TO THIS BLOG===============

After being challenged (in the comments on another related thread) concerning something I originally had written in this note, I will include my rebuttal to that challenge here:

Someone brought up an interesting observation concerning the additional 33 days of purification (in Lev. 12:4), which I confess I had not sufficiently considered. I thank them for that. Although, the only thing that changes is the fact that Mary could not have gone to the Temple during Sukkot. OK, great. That does not nullify a 9/11 Trumpets birth though. Nothing in my thesis *requires* that He be able to physically “tabernacle among His people” (as in participating in Sukkot). Just being the “Word made flesh” fulfills this “skénoó” idea in my mind. Thus, I see Leviticus 12:1-4 as really being a refutation of the Sukkot birth/tabernacling among the people idea, which only reinforces my argument.

Bottom line: I can’t get around Rev. 12 and its PRECISE 80 minute fulfillment on Sept. 11, -2 (3BC), which was during a new moon. What else are we to do with that than simply believe it? I cannot see any other valid interpretation for the first 5 verses other than the birth and subsequent assention of Yeshua. Who else was born to rule “ALL nations with a rod of iron” [compare also Psalm 2:9; Rev. 2:27 and Rev. 19:15] and ascended to God and to his throne except Him? I see no evidence that He will be (literally) born again in the flesh. So, how can these verses mean anything else? And is it just an AMAZING “coincidence” that this exact sign was PERFECTLY fulfilled at a time that PERFECTLY fits for the birth of Christ? I think not. Seems to me to be an exact fulfillment. Looking at this map, I can see the following scenario as most likely:

Mary and Joseph left Nazareth for Bethlehem. They give birth to baby Yeshua on Yom Teruah (Feast of Trumpets). Mary has her time of “uncleanness” for 7 days (Lev. 12:2) while remaining in Bethlehem, having Yeshua circumcised there on the 8th day as commanded by Moses. They remain there for the rest of her 40 days of purification (Lev. 12:4), then head to Jerusalem (nearly a month) AFTER Sukkot for His dedication (Luke 2:22-24) and finally head home shortly thereafter.

============= END CORRECTION TO THIS BLOG============

PS: Some have raised the issue of Herod’s death as a possible problem with the 9/11/3BC birth. Here is a good article, which may resolve that issue:

– Rob Skiba

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.