178 REV. p. p. FLOUENOY, D.D.^ ON BEARING OF ARCH^OLOGICAL 



years another has been fixed by an inscription found at Delphi, 

 which records that Gallio (Acts xviii, 12) was proconsul of Achaia 

 from summer A.D. 51 to summer A.D. 52, according to the recent 

 interpretation by Prof, Deissmann. 



Only on January 6th last Canon Knowling in his paper on 

 " Present-Day Factors in New Testament Study," read before this 

 Institute, mentioned the date B.C. 8 (about) for the Nativity, as now 

 indisputable. This date was first definitely propounded in 1907, 

 but it was accepted at once by several.^ Last year (1912) Sir W. M. 

 Eamsayt discovered an inscription at Antioch bearing the name of 

 Quirinus, which renders it certain that he was in supreme command 

 in Syria during a period which included B.C. 8 — the time of the 

 first enrolment (Luke ii, 1), and thus this date for the Nativity is 

 further established by very recent archaeological discovery. 



A majority of scholars have long thought that A.D. 29 is the most 

 probable date for the Crucifixion. The acceptance of B.C. 8 for the 

 Nativity greatly strengthens this supposition. If both these dates 

 are accepted^ and also a Ministry of three years and a-half, it is easily 

 seen that our Lord must have been just thirty-two years old when 

 He began His public career ; this age is well covered, according to 

 Dean Alford, by the expression " about thirty years of age " 

 (Luke iii, 23). 



I have attempted to confirm this date (a.d. 29) by indirect 

 references in the Gospels to the periods of shining of the morning 

 star J (these periods are known from astronomical calculations) ; and 

 also from direct and indirect references in the Gospels to the striking 

 events of the Sabbath year.§ 



It is generally assumed that the Crucifixion was on a Friday and 

 also on the fourteenth day of Nisan,the spring lunation (Exodus xii, 6). 

 This being accepted, the question arises : Could these conditions have 

 been satisfied in A.D. 29, for it is very evident that the Uth Nisan 

 was not a Friday in most years. The answer to this question 

 depends upon the arrangement of the Jewish calendar, in which 



" The Date of the Nativity was B.C. 8," Toxms. Vict. Inst., vol. xli, 

 1909. 



t " Luke's Narrative of the Birth of Christ," The Expositor, Nov. 

 1912, pp. 385 if. 



X Trans. Vict. Inst., vol. xxxviii, 1906, pp. 242 ff. 



§ " The Magi: How They Eecognised Christ's Star," 1907, pp. 87 fF. " The 

 Sabbath \^ear," The Friends' Witness, Oct. 1911, p. 125. 



