Why do scholars say Jesus was born in 4 B.C. instead of year zero?
Archaeology showed that King Herod’s rule, reign, and death required Christ to have been born in 4 B.C., not at year zero, according to the Gregorian calendar. Chronologers had assumed Christ was born at zero and that Adam was created in 4,000 B.C. The adjusted chronology places Adam’s creation at 4,004 B.C. and Christ’s birth at 4 B.C.
Les teaches that chronologers long assumed Christ was born at what we call zero and that Adam was created in 4,000 B.C. But thanks to archaeology some years ago, they put together the fact that because of King Herod’s rule and reign and death, Christ had to have been born 4 B.C. according to our now Gregorian calendar. He explains that if Adam was created 4,004 B.C. instead of 4,000, then Christ was born 4 B.C. This also puts His crucifixion at 29 B.C. instead of 33 B.C. Les notes that people wonder why he places the crucifixion at 29 B.C., since they always thought He was crucified when He was 33; He was, but Les goes with the newer findings that Christ was born 4 B.C. instead of on zero.