Featured Exodus 12:18

You are wrong here.

@Silverhair stated an affirmation of Scripture.

Your claim that NOT to accept what you believe is "problematic" is actually problematic because, as @Silverhair noted, it is extabiblical.

The date is not knowable Biblically. We can make assumptions and come up with a date per the 1st century Hebrew Calendar ("observation and reckoning"). But we cannot know the Julian Calendar date or the modern Hebrew Calendar equivalent.

BUT you impose a modern method to calculate lunar cycles.....which can't tell us the actual date because they used observation and reckoning (NOT calculation....that would come much later in Jewish history).


You failed to provide a weather forecast for the dates in question. We don't know if the moon was observed (remember the issue with the Seleucids). So you could be a day off or a week off.

You failed to provide a crop update (we don't know if aviv was delayed). So you could be several weeks off.


As Christians we should avoid "old women's fables". They are not only divisive but they harm ones witness (if you can't be trusted with small things then how can you be trusted with important things?).

 

You made assumptions and ignored the pre-12th century Hebrew method for determining dates.

What we cannot do is correlate the 1st century Hebrew Calendar with that date.

For example, if March 23-27 provided no observation but March 28 was clear then 1 Nisan would begin 29 March 30 AD (Julian Calendar) and your date would be off.

If there was a drought in early may you would be even more off.


You simply followed the Biblical account of 1st century events, bounced them off Exodus, and calculated lunar cycles completely ignoring the Hebrew Calendar used in the 1st century.

I get it. We like modern stuff. We don't like the cloud of history. Our culture prizes simplicity. Compute lunar cycles. Replace Greek words with English words. Problem is it is not so simple.

With all of our technology and tools avaliable Christians seem to drift into discovering hidden "truths" every day. Every man is his own theologian and Greek expert. I'm not sure that we are any better than the days when we considered the ideas of experts in the field.

 

Nonsense.

Mine was an example - I don't know the weather, and neither do you. You assume it was a clear sky. You assume the crops were as expected.

But those are ASSUMPTIONS. You can't know. You have a theory (one most scholars reject), but you can't come close to knowing.


Using the 12th century Hebrew calendar you'd be right.

BUT the 1st century Jews used the 1st century Hebrew Calendar ("observation and reckoning").

You have failed to prove that the conditions aligned with your dating scheme.

There is a reason that the Jews changed to calculation in the 12th century AD.

You prove yourself wrong by not bring able to account for the 1st century Hebrew Calendar (nobody can) and using lunar calculations.


This is why I say a little technology in place of true study is a terrible thing.

There is a good reason you hold a view few scholars would endorse. There is a readon no legitimate scholar, although providing theories, insist we cannot know.

They studied the 1st century Judaism where as you study the moon.

You are simply wrong. And you will not give it up because you'd rather hold on to your pride than concede to fact.

 

Nonsense post.

Just because we do not know the exact date does not mean there is no historical crucifixion.

We do not know the exact date of Creation. That does not mean there is no historical Creation.

We do not know the exact date of Christ's ascension.
We do not know know the exact date of Christ's birth.
We do not know the exact date of the Flood.
We do not know the exact date Jesus turned water into wine.
We do not know the exact date God delivered the Law to Moses.
We do not know the exact date Jesus healed the blind man.

But all of those are historical.

They are historical because they are historical events testified to by God's Word.


By your reasoning not knowing the exact date of Christ's birth means there can be no resurrection (no historical birth means no historical resurrection).

Your faith in the secular is mispmisplaced and you are making the crucifixion a myth - making our faith a mythology - by rejecting facts to create a fiction in order to make up "evidence" to prove the faith.



Even if we could know the exact date (if we knew the 1st century calendar aligned with the 12th century calender) all we woukd have us a date. This would not make the crucifixion "historical". All it woukd do is give you a date.


Your reasoning is severely flawed.

Nobody rejects that there was a historical date that the crucifixion took place or supposedly took place. Nobody is saying that the Passover was not observed each year in the 1st century.

 

It is according to the 12th century AD Hebrew calendar.

But we are talking about events that occurred in the 1st century. So we have to consider the 1st century Hebrew Calendar because that is what they would have used in the 1st century.

They had specific rules. One was that if it was impossible to see the moon then the month would begin the 1st day it was visible.

That is why your calculations fail. You do not know when the moon was observed.

In the 1st century AD the Hebrew Calendar was based on "observation and reckoning", NOT calculation (that would come centuries later).

Your theory is akin to the candycane legend. It may give you warm and fuzzy feelings, but it is not true. And being false it can damage your witness.

 

I should add the reason that the original Hebrew calendar was based on observation and the 1st century Hebrew Calendar on "observation and reckoning".



In the OT God gave the "lights in the heavens" for signs. The Jews took this literally - one observed the signs. See Deuteronomy 16 as well.

In the 1st century the Jews maintained lunar observations, but years were also influenced by the Bablyonian Calendar (they observed years as a solar calendar, months as a lunar calendar) and adjusted accordingly.

The moon had to be observed to begin Nisan 1. If this could not be done due to weather conditions then the month would begin the first evening that the moon was observed.


The Jews in the 1st century took God's instruction in a very legalistic way. One had to observe the signs (the "lights in the heavens").


This would change centuries later. But it does mean that we cannot know the exact Julian date because we cannot know what was observed.

 

Yes, it is.

This is because you are using lunar calculations when in the 1st century they used observation and reckoning.

Do you really not grasp the difference (exactly why we cannot know the exact date)????

 

Based on the fact that in the 1st century, as in the OT, the Jews used a method they believe prescribed by God called "observation". They believed they were to observe (to see with their eyes) the "lights in the heaven" that God provided as "signs".

We know this as a fact because the Jews prior to using calculations wrote laws to keep laws.

One of these was what to do if the moon was not visible. They wrote that, in this case, the evening when a person (a human being) could see the moon would start that month.


This was remedied, however, in the 12th century when the Jews changed to a method of calculating lunar cycles for months and tracking solar for the years.


You are imposing a method that was not used by the Jews in the 1st century AD. You are wrong.....not necessarily in your date but that the exact date can be known.

You don't know if the moon was obscured that first day, making the month begin on the second. There is no possible way you could know, so you use a method they did not use.

 

Sure.

It is SIMPLE - The original Hebrew calendar was based on visual observation - NOT calculation.

The history of the Jewish calendar is divided into three periods—the Biblical, the Talmudic, and the post-Talmudic.

The first is the OT calendar, and it rested purely on the observation of the sun and the moon. The only reckoning here was post exile as the Bablyonian influences on years (not months).

The second on observation and reckoning. This began around 200 AD (Rabbi Judah I).

The third relied entirely on reckoning (on calculations. This started with the calendar being fixed by Hillel II, but today's calculations are based on the more accurate 12th century model.

We are talking about the 1st century AD, when men would visually observe the moon and report to the leaders who would meet and verify, ultimately announcing the official start.

You simple cannot know when the moon was observed because you do not have that data.