Every wrong view.

[37818]

?????

That IS the Biblical Hebrew Calendar per Scripture. Who am I to add to what God gave?

When the Jews observed the first sliver of moon it was 1 Avid. The rest is based off this observation.

BUT when converting dates to a Julian Calendar I also use the post-Talmudic Hebrew Calendar.

The reason is I do not know the forecast (I don't know if the moon was visually observed). So I use what I do know - lunar cycles - while keeping in mind that any year the Biblical Hebrew Calendar was used could be like the several recorded times Aviv began late due to a lack of observation.

What does this mean as to days of week and the 3rd being the 1st day of a week? And is it some unknown year?

I am not going to try to figure out your crucifixion dates.

My view has been presented.

 

[JonC]

What does this mean as to days of week and the 3rd being the 1st day of a week? And is it some unknown year?

I am not going to try to figure out your crucifixion dates.

My view has been presented.

There are 7 days in the week.
The Sabbath is the 7th day.

1 Aviv began when at least two messengers reported having seen a sliver of moon after the new moon. The messengers were separated and asked a series of questions. The Sanhedrin woukd decide if the reports were true. If they accepted the reports as true then a torch in Jerusalem was lit and those outside of Jerusalem followed suit, announcing the start of Aviv.

So yes, by definition the date cannot be known be cause we cannot know all of the circumstances that could have postponed the start of the month.

Now, if we use your calendar for a good guess (and I do) then we can fairly easily calculate Friday April 3, 33AD as the probable date of the crucifixion because it is the only date that aligns with Biblical history.

But it is still assuming visual observation was accurate.

 

[JonC]

@37818

What date did you come up with?

 

[37818]

There are 7 days in the week.
The Sabbath is the 7th day.

1 Aviv began when at least two messengers reported having seen a sliver of moon after the new moon. The messengers were separated and asked a series of questions. The Sanhedrin woukd decide if the reports were true. If they accepted the reports as true then a torch in Jerusalem was lit and those outside of Jerusalem followed suit, announcing the start of Aviv.

So yes, by definition the date cannot be known be cause we cannot know all of the circumstances that could have postponed the start of the month.

Now, if we use your calendar for a good guess (and I do) then we can fairly easily calculate Friday April 3, 33AD as the probable date of the crucifixion because it is the only date that aligns with Biblical history.

But it is still assuming visual observation was accurate.

The Calendars that depicts Friday April 3, 33 AD as the 14th of Nisan, Hebrew Calendar

 

[37818]

You still have not explained exactly how that calculation determines visual observation. How does it calculate a clear sky? How is an overcast sky ruled out?

In my view are irrelevant questions.

 

[JonC]

The Calendars that depicts Friday April 3, 33 AD as the 14th of Nisan, Hebrew Calendar

Yes.

Like I said REPEATEDLY, that is the calendar I use to calculate dates.

The reason is we cannot calculate forecasts, but we can lunar cycles. It's the best we have.

My point is that we cannot state a date as a fact because do not know the visual observation (what they spied with their little eyes).

We know IF it was not overcast THEN they probably saw the sliver of moon and IF the Sanhedrin agreed with the report it is a correct date.

But stating it as fact is assuming and I do not believe we should be careless with God's Word.

 

[JonC]

In my view are irrelevant questions.

In a Biblical view it is not. That is the problem with your insistence that we impose a calendar not used at the time on the 1st century.

This is the point - you dismiss Biblical history.

 

[JonC]

@37818

What date did you come up with?

 

[37818]

@37818

What date did you come up with?

I have posted it many times. And you have argued against what I had explained.

Here without explaining the Thursday April 6, 30, Nisan 15th calendars, Hebrew Calendar

 

[37818]

In a Biblical view it is not. That is the problem with your insistence that we impose a calendar not used at the time on the 1st century.

This is the point - you dismiss Biblical history.

In my understanding I do not reject Biblical History. We have not agreed.

 

[JonC]

I have posted it many times. And you have argued against what I had explained.

Here without explaining the Thursday April 6, 30, Nisan 15th calendars, Hebrew Calendar

Yea....I couldn't recall the date.

So.....per your view:

1. Jesus was baptized in the 13th year of Tiberius' reign

2. Jesus arose on the 4th day

3. John lied about the day if Jesus' crucifixion being the day before Passover and a Sabbath.

Your date is unbiblical and too early.

 

[JonC]

In my understanding I do not reject Biblical History. We have not agreed.

It does not matter what your understanding is. You do reject Biblical history.

Otherwise you would have known about the issues with the 1st century Hebrew Calendar system, about Tiberius' reign, and about the differences in Passover observance between Jewish sects.

You didn't even know there were three distinct (different) Hebrew Calendar systems.

It may have been mere ignorance when you started these threads, but now it is rejection.

You seek to divorce the crucifixion from history, to blend the Old Testament with the New, to ignore centuries of history between the two Testaments.....in essence, to create a Christian mythology apart from history.

By your reasoning Julius Caesar never actually lived because, while recorded in history, he is not mentioned in the Bible.

We cannot divorce the crucifixion from history, as an actual historical event, without making the crucifixion nothing but a myth.

 

[37818]

It does not matter what your understanding is. You do reject Biblical history.

You are wrong.

 

[37818]

1. Jesus was baptized in the 13th year of Tiberius' reign

In my view is between 27 AD to 28 AD is IN, not after the 15th year 28 AD. I know most do not agree.

2. Jesus arose on the 4th day

Wrong. Jesus rose on the 3rd day, Luke 24:21.

3. John lied about the day if Jesus' crucifixion being the day before Passover and a Sabbath.

John is misinterpreted to contradict Matthew, Mark and Luke.

 

[percho]

The problem is when people seek to place Biblical events in history and insist that the only history to be considered is in Scripture.

The Bible is not a history book. It is redemptive history, but a lot of things are not in the Bible that occurred in history.

For example, we can reference 1st century writing documenting that the Jewish families were not killing the Passover as prescribed in Exodus (Rabbi Gamaliel I is one example).

We know that the day of the Biblical calendar for killing the Passover is 14 Nisan. But at the same time we know that Galilean Jews killed the Passover before sundown on Nisan 13 and ate the Supper as Nisan 14 began (while Judean Jews killed the Passover in the afternoon of Nisan 14 and ate the meal at the start of 15 Nisan).

To ignore the possibility that Mark observed and wrote of the killing of the Passover on 13 Nisan is to seek a mythology separated from history.

It is an attempt to negate other possibilities by divorcing Scripture from actual history.

The above is stated no where in the word of God.

According to the Word of God; Was the passover to be killed on a specific day in a specific time frame and after being killed, eaten in a specific manner?

Please explain to me how Jesus, the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world, could have eaten the passover, the year he fulfilled being the passover?

 

[JonC]

The above is stated no where in the word of God.

According to the Word of God; Was the passover to be killed on a specific day in a specific time frame and after being killed, eaten in a specific manner?

Please explain to me how Jesus, the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world, could have eaten the passover, the year he fulfilled being the passover?

Nowhere in God's Word does it say how they observed the Passover in the 1st century. I absolutely agree.

For that we have to read 1st century accounts.

Another departure from tge Law is the lack of a priest when families sacrificed.


Jesus could not have eaten the Sadducee's Passover. But He could the Galilean Passover.

The reason is they would have been killing the Passover 24 hours before. They observed the evening at the start of Nisan 14 as Passover while the Temple observed the evening at the end as Passover.

 

[JonC]

In my view is between 27 AD to 28 AD is IN, not after the 15th year 28 AD. I know most do not agree.

Wrong. Jesus rose on the 3rd day, Luke 24:21.

John is misinterpreted to contradict Matthew, Mark and Luke.

You are wrong.

Not most but all agree that Tiberius' 15th year was 28-29 AD.

Those who date the crucifixion at

In my view is between 27 AD to 28 AD is IN, not after the 15th year 28 AD. I know most do not agree.

Wrong. Jesus rose on the 3rd day, Luke 24:21.

John is misinterpreted to contradict Matthew, Mark and Luke.

You are wrong. It is not that most do not agree. All do not agree. The reason is the math is wrong.

This is why those who want a 30 AD date insist that Tiberius must have ruled with Augustus before he reigned alone.

If you are saying Jesus was crucified on Thursday but did not die until after sundown then the 1st day of the week would be that 3rd day.

But if you are saying Jesus died on Thursday before dark then He arose on the 4th day (the 1st day of the week).

John is very clear. Jesus was crucified the day before Passover which was also a Sabbath. There is no misinterpreting "Passover" because as a day it is always Passover (as a week it is 7 or 8 days depending on the Jewish sect).

You need to study Biblical history and then revisit this topic.

 

[JonC]

You are wrong.

Let's test it out:

Biblical history:

1. The 1st century Jews were composed of several sects. The Galilean Passover was killed in the afternoon of 13 Nisan while the Judean Passover was killed on the afternoon of 14 Nisan. Both considered this to be observing the Law. But Pharisees were more liberal in their interpretations.

2. The 15th year of Tiberius' reign was Sep 28 AD to Sep 29 AD.

3. The 15th year in which Tiberius reigned is 28 AD.

4. Tiberius was made the Roman military tribute after the death of Gaius in 4 AD.

5. The 1st century Jews used the Biblical Hebrew Calendar which was based on visual observation rather than calculation. This would start changing over the next few centuries.


That is Biblical history. You have repeatedly stated that you reject Biblical history, noting that most of the 1st century historical events and methods are not recorded in the Bible and therefore should be ignored.


Biblical history, like American history, is not subjective. People can have ideas about history that are subjective, but history itself is objective.

You do, in fact, reject Biblical history. You reject 1st century history unless it is recorded in Scripture, which means you are clueless regarding the 1st century environment and culture.

 

[37818]

You do, in fact, reject Biblical history. You reject 1st century history unless it is recorded in Scripture, which means you are clueless regarding the 1st century environment and culture.

I do not believe I do. Am I wrong on my understanding of the some of the history may be my problem.
Crucifixion being on such and such day and being wrong on it doesn't mean one rejects Biblical history.
Mark 15:42, being Friday evening or Thursday evening. One view being correct, the the other would be wrong. It is not rejecting Biblical history.

 

[37818]

The Galilean Passover was killed in the afternoon of 13 Nisan while the Judean Passover was killed on the afternoon of 14 Nisan.

This distinction is not found in the Bible.