Sir, - Dave Walsh (December 16th) takes me to task for claiming that the generally accepted date for the Millennium is "the 2000th anniversary of the birth of Christ and the moment when God came down into human history".
Mr Walsh suggests that as Herod died during the year 4 BC, Jesus would have to have been born before that date.
I agree that while it is indeed difficult to determine the exact date of Christ's birth, referred to by Luke and Matthew in the New Testament, we can be fairly certain that it was closer to 1 AD. The fact that Herod the Great died in 4BC has no significance, because it was during the 43-year reign of his son, Herod Antipas, in Galilee (4 BC to 39 AD), that Jesus exercised his public ministry.
If we try to base the year of Christ's birth on the appearance of certain known comets and stars, for instance, Halley's Comet in 12 BC, or the triple conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in Pisces in 7 BC, we have to ignore the historical fact that Herod Antipas ruled Galilee during the life of Jesus.
Therefore, I believe that we should accept the millennium year as the one now generally agreed throughout the world. However, if we really wish to be precise about the day, then let us highlight Christmas Day 2000, instead of January 1st. - Yours, etc., John O'Halloran,
Bantry Road, Dublin 9.