The Calendar According to Scripture

The Calendar According to Scripture

Sept. 18, 2018: The Calendar:

There three different definite definitions of a “day” (yom) to be considered, three different definitions of hodesh, and three different definitions of a “year.” A day may be just the daylight period, 12 hours, or a 24 hour calendar day, either dawn to dawn, or dusk to dusk. Hodesh may mean a month or a new moon or a new moon day. A year may mean the solar year, the lunar year, or the agricultural year. The limits of days are when the light of the sun springs forth or fades away. The new moon is when the light of the moon becomes visible after a dark period. The solar year begins again when the sun completes is repetitive cycle of 365 or 366 days, by ancient consensus taken to be when the sun sets due west after the winter. The biblical calendar may be determined on a purely observational basis with no need for calculations.

Other terms we should know are erev which means. 1. setting, 2. sunset, 3. growing dark, 4. dusk. I often translate it setting because it refers to what the light is doing and covers events on all creation days even when the sun was not created. Unlike most dialects of English erev may refer to afternoon when the light begins to set. Generally erev does not mean dark after the full dark of night comes. The term boqer means, 1. daybreak, 2. morning. It is a synonym of dawn. Unlike English the term was not used to refer to the dark after midnight nor generally to time closing in on noon. Erev and boqer are commonly used to refer to the beginning and ending limits of the night respectively.

The Biblical Basis

The biblical calendar is not any more nor less controversial than any other issue of Scripture interpretation, nor any more nor less contentious between people when it comes to matters of observance or teaching. For example the role of repentance in salvation is controverted just as much as the calendar. And the meaning of Messiah’s atonement is also disputed. So the calendar should not be viewed as the most contentious issue. Every issue is argued over. The reasons for the controversies are common to all arguments:

1. An adversary at war with the truth
2. People at war with the truth
3. People misled by lies and false teaching
4. Differing interpretations of Scripture
5. Differing translations of Scripture
6. Differing traditions to be maintained
7. Family ties and social networks
8. Stumbling over the parables

We live in an alternate universe, much like the one in Star Trek, where evil has taken over, so that we who have the truth feel much like the crew of the “normal” Enterprise accidentally transported to the alternate universe. Murphy’s law of the alternate universe: the more important the truth on a matter is the more false doctrines there will be to fence it in by the “authorities” of the alternate universe.

The question is how to tell who is telling the truth, and who is not? The main tool people have for checking things out is that false explanations eventually contradict a detail or fact that must be true, and are therefore objectively exposed as false. Also the truly faithful, and the truly seeking have the Holy Spirit to point them in the right directions. Finally, prayers for discernment get answered.

In order to discover the truth all three elements have to be working: 1. Test the story lines for inconsistency against the witnesses, 2. Know the Almighty loves to guide the seeker to the answer, 3. Ask for discernment.

When there are enough witnesses to a matter, and they all line up, and you are sure the witnesses did not collude with various forms of circular reasoning, i.e. making assumptions which are then in turn used to form the conclusions, then you can be reasonably certain you have arrived at the truth of a matter. Finding the truth means also exposing the arguments that attack it. For there is no lie or liar who can completely keep their story straight with reality. If reality is examined enough then the lie will be exposed.

The Parable Principle

There is a principle in Scripture. I call it the parable principle. Key elements of the truth are hidden in texts that seem to be talking about other things. Even the most uneducated of Christians ought to know that the Messianic Faith rests upon the teaching of the “third day.” The “third day” theme is cryptically imbedded in scripture stories. What is more, we should recognize that the “third day” is a chronological issue, and therefore a calendar issue (of first importance, cf. 1 Cor. 15). The purpose of the parable principle is clearly stated in scripture. 1. let the weeds and wheat grow together; pulling the weeds might pull up the wheat, 2. So that the seeing will not see, and the hearing will not hear. This was clearly stated by Messiah, and the reason for stating things in parables can be summed up in one phrase: the strategy for dealing with sinful man and his slave masters, the powers below. On the other hand, Messiah explained everything to his disciples. The blind will see and the deaf hear.

The Day

Summary:

1. a definite “day”: dawn to dusk
2. a definite “day”: dawn to dawn
3. a definite “day”: dusk to dusk
4. an indefinite period of time

In Genesis 1:5 it says, “Then the Almighty calls the light day.” We have to use some basic logic here. When is it light? From dawn to dusk. So day here is defined as a period of about 12 hours. See also John 11:9. Matthew 12:40. There are many passages where “day” clearly means the daylight period.

Genesis 1:5 implies a second definition of day. At the end of Gen. 1:5 it says, “Then it is setting. Then it is daybreak: day one.” Day one is summed up at daybreak ending the night contained between evening and morning. Then Genesis proceeds to the next day. The implication is a calendar day starting with a literal day, followed by a night: one cycle of day and night, or dawn to dawn.

At this point we should examine the alternative view expressed by the King James Version, “And the evening and the morning were the first day.” This would appear to say that the day began with nightime and ended with daytime. What we should not believe here is the translation, because it does not correspond to the Hebrew text. The KJV version deleted the verb structure, “Then it is...” twice, and then reinserted the verb after morning. The translators were not following the text. They were following tradition. The effect of deleting the verbs and adding it back in another place is to change the meaning of the text so that an evening is assumed to have happened before light was created, and the day light was created is equivocated with the morning in the phrase, “The evening and the morning were the first day.” The mistranslation implies a definition of day from dusk to dusk. We shall see the dusk to dusk day later in Scripture. It is not stated in Gen. 1, nor explicitly even with the seventh day in chapter 2.

It is clear from the fact that the Almighty created in the daytime, and the fact that each daytime was followed by evening and morning (containing a night) that each day is being summed up from daybreak to daybreak, or dawn to dawn. So in addition to the 12 hour day, we are given a second definition of “day” from dawn to dawn.

Creation Work is Finished

The sixth day ends at dawn just like the rest. But before evening is mentioned for the sixth day, the text notes that the Almighty saw all that he had made, and behold it was very good. We may infer from this that he created nothing more after the sun set. At day break the heavens and earth were finished (Gen. 2:1). The verb finished is passive, denoting a state. The heveans and earth were in a state of being finished. This does not mean he finished after sunset. It is only recording after sunset that they were finished.

“And the Almighty declared to be finished, on the seventh day, his work, which he had done. Then he rests on the seventh day from all his work, which he had done” (Gen. 2:2). The seventh day here, in my opinion is clearly only 12 hours, like the first definition given in Gen. 1:5. Does this mean the Sabbath is only 12 hours also? I think not. At first man naturally did not work at night when there was no light. Therefore, the text is not emphasizing when the Sabbath should begin. It is emphasizing the literal 12 hour seventh day when he declared his work finished.

It is possible to take the first definition of day through the entire narrative, 12 hours, dawn to dusk, if we consider the summation of the days taken at the end of the nights to refer only to the daytime when the Almighty created. This way a dawn to dawn 24 hour day is only implied by the arrangement, but not explicitly required. This allows us to impose a dawn to dawn calendar day, or to impose a 12 hour day. Imposing a dusk to dusk day, however, is not possible. For all the nights, evening to morning, are mentioned at the end of their respective days. If one includes the night, one gets a 24 hour dawn to dawn day. If one excludes the night, one gets a 12 hour day, dawn to dusk.

It is my conclusion then that the seventh day must include 12 hours of daytime by all interpretations on the basis of Genesis 1-2. It is implicit in the statement that “the Almighty saw all that he had made” that the text also indicates when he stopped working, just before sunset on the sixth day. And this implication is all that is given in Genesis. It is, however, an implication that is only reinforced later in Scripture by the timing of Sabbaths. I would argue then, that the night before the seventh day is the natural fence on the Sabbath, and since Adam would not think of working at night, he did not do so, but followed the example of the Creator and surveyed his work by sunset on each sixth day. Our modern habits and artificial lights make it difficult to grasp what was imposed by the created order.

The Seventh Day declared Blessed and Holy

“Then the Almighty declared to be blessed the seventh day. Then he declared it to be holy, because in it he had rested from all his work, which the Almighty had created to do.” These are delcarative PIEL’s, that is, he is making a declaration. It does not mean that it began to blessed when he said it, or began to be holy when he said it. A good example of declarative PIEL is when the priest declared somone unclean (cf. Lev. 13:3, 6, etc). It is clearly not meant to say the person started being unclean when he declared it. It should be noted that because the translators do not understand the declarative PIEL that all translations of Gen. 2:2 are incorrect. He did not end his work on the 7th day as many translations say or imply. Also, translating “by the seventh day” is not a good translation either, nor is the solution of the Old Greek or Samaritan text correct when it revises the text to say “on the sixth day he finished his work.” These translators clearly saw the problem, but did not know how to fix it.

Dusk to Dusk (or sunset to sunset)

Later in Scripture, the seven days of unleavened bread are counted from sunset on the 14th to sunset on the 21st day, clearly timing the seven days as 24 hours from sunset to sunset. The first of the seven days is a Sabbath, and the seventh of the seven days is a Sabbath. So the night before the days are counted with the days. Also Yom Kippur is likewise counted from the evening of the 9th day to the evening of the 10th. The night before the 10th day is reckoned with the Yom Kippur Shabbat. In Nehemiah, he has the gates shut as they come into shadow before the Sabbath. The gates are shut before night falls. In Mark, the people bring all the sick to be healed as soon as the sun set at the end of the Sabbath. Also the resurrection of Messiah was on the first Sabbath after Passover, “while it was still dark” (John 20:1), and also the third night had not turned into a fourth day. All these observations show that work was stopped the night before the seventh day, which is consistent with the Almighty surveying all his work and observing it good before the sun set on the sixth day.

Day meaning an indefinite time period:

In Gen. 2:4 “day” is used in the sense of a time period lasting 6 days.

In Gen. 2:17 “day” is used in the sense of a time period outlasting Adam’s lifespan. It may stand for 1000 years in that passage.

In other places, such as the “Day of Yahweh,” the word day is used in a sense of time.

Dawn to Dawn

For peace offerings, the day is explicitly from dawn to dawn, also for the ascending offering (burnt offering), and the continual offering. Key texts are those which allow the offering to be eaten the same day it was offered, but mandate it to be eaten by daybreak. See Lev. 7:15 and Passover regulations. Also see Lev. 6:9-10 where the daily offering was to burn all night, and then it ended at dawn when the ashes were cleaned out. Numbers 28:1-4 specify two lambs per day, the first at daybreak and the second in the afternoon, and these are to burn all night on the altar. This more than implies a day ending at daybreak. It logically requires it, because the first lamb burns for the day and for the night.

Counting the Third Day

Scripture tells us how to count the third day by example, “Today, tomorrow, the third day.” And also going backwards, “Today,” “yesterday,” “the third day.” Messiah counts, “I do cures today and tommorow, and the third day I shall be perfected” (Luke 13:32). It is clear that Hebrew thought counts the third day inclusively. Three days is not counted (1) tomorrow, (2) the next day, (3) the third day. Therefore, the crucifixion goes with “today” and the resurrection with “the third day.” Also illustrating the inclusive count is, “after two days he will raise us...on the third day.” He tears and strikes (Hos. 6:1). After two days he raises, which is on the third day. These things are in parable language. The deaf will hear; the blind see. And the seeing will be blind, and the hearing deaf. The three days are, a day and night, a day and night, a day and night, or three calendar days based upon the daily offerings of three days.

The Month

According to Gen. 1:14-18 the sun and the moon were created to provide light on the earth, and to be for signs, and for appointed times, and for days, and years. The implication is that the month, day, and year would be timed by the appearance or circumstances of visible light coming from the sun and moon.

The controversy is about what defines the “new moon” that begins a month. In fact the same word may mean “new moon,” “new moon day,” or “month:” hodesh. But every month must begin with a new moon of some sort. Some say, it is the conjuction. Some say that it is one of the days between conjunction and first visibility. And we say it is first visibility.

No. 1: The implication of Gen. 1:14-18 is that it is the light that makes the sign, and therefore first visibility should be used rather than calculations of the conjuction, or some other day of invisibility. Calculation of the conjunction is a location of the physical moon, which cannot be seen other than by light. Calculation was not avaiable to man at first.

No. 2: This implication (of sighting by light) is confirmed by the later use of Babylonian month and day designations in the prophets Ezekiel, Haggai, and Zechariah; also Nehemiah and Ezra. The Babylonians determined their new moons by sighting the first re-appearance of the moon. The Babylonian calendar would have been unadaptable to Scriptural use if Babylonian day numbers were constantly differing from their biblical counterparts.

No. 3: Jewish extra-biblical sources testify that the new moon was determined by visual sighting during the first Temple period. Josephus’ use of the Syrio-Macedonian calendar as a Hebrew equivalent also confirms visual sighting, because the Macedonians visually sighted the moon. If Philo is carefully read, he also confirms visual sighting. The Mishnah and Talmud also confirm that visual sighting was performed and the witnesses were interviewed by the Sanhedrin court.

No. 4: Numerous historical chronological dates in scripture consistently work out only on the basis of the new moon being first visibility.

1. The Deluge Calendar
2. Exodus year dates
3. Entry into Canaan dates
4. Solomon’s commencement of Temple building
5. Neo-Babylonian dates cited by the prophets
6. Dates associated with Yohanan’s birth
7. Dates associated with Messiah’s birth
8. Dates associated with Messiah’s death and resurrection

Obviously these topics reqire more study by most readers, but I will mention but one confirmation. Jewish historical tradition says in Seder Olam that the second Temple was destroyed on the 9th of Av on the first day. We may confirm that this is correct for August 5th, AD 70, but only if the 9th of Av is computed on the basis of a visual sighting. It does not work on the basis of conjunction. As a second witness, Zechariah, John the Baptist’s father, went off duty, and arrived back home on the first day, which was the new moon. On the sixth new moon, the Messenger appeared to his wife’s cousin Miryam. On the seventh new moon of the next year, Messiah was born, per Rev. 12:1-2. These calculations work out in 3 to 2 BC, but only if the new moon is determined by visual sighting. You may see the articles pertaining to this.

Rabbinic “New Moons”

It should be noted that the Rabbinic calendar is inconsistent and contains errors:

1. It was introduced at the earliest in AD 359 and developed between then and the 10 century AD.
2. It uses an equinox calculation that is outdated. As a result of the inaccuracy, the fixed Rabbinic calendar is drifting in the seasons through time much like the Julian calendar did before Pope Gregory fixed the Roman calendar to prevent its seasonal drift.
3. It has a complicated set of rules that either allow the “new moon” day to land on the day of the conjunction, or sometimes begin before the conjucntion, up to postponing the new moon day in some cases as far as the day of first visiblity. None of these complicated rules are revealed in Scripture.
4. No important dates from biblical times can be calculated using the Rabbinic calendar method
5. The same Rabbis that implemented the fixed calendar believed in a biblical chronology implemented in Seder Olam, ca. AD 150. This chronology clearly re-interprets Daniel 9:24-27 (which predicts the coming of Messiah Yeshua) by dating the prophecy between the destruction of the first Temple and the second Temple to be 490 years. In the process they had to delete 165 years of Persian History to reduce the time period to 490 years. The whole purpose of this deception was to make sure that the official Jewish chronology would in no way support Yeshua being the Messiah.
6. The received Jewish “calendar” therefore disagrees radically with actual biblical chronology, and the actual definition of the new moon necessary to confirm biblical chronology dates.

Many Messianic Jews may admit the calendar is broken, but many others will not acknowledge this. And many others are ignorant that the Rabbinic calendar does not agree with Scripture. Nevertheless, they are following the majority party for the sake of the “unity of Israel.” Several observations must be made:

1. This unity is merely the implementation of Rabbinic Authority, supposedly based on Deut. 17, but actually is a misinterpretation of those texts. It would require another paper to show the false teaching that comes on the basis of this text and what the correction is.
2. The Rabbis actually spent several centuries overcoming other sects of Judaism with their false pretensions to authority, much like the Roman Catholic Church overcame dissedent Christian communities to bring them under the umbrella of Rome.
3. This unity opens the door for deception of Messianic Jews on other matters related to Yeshua because of their submission to rabbinic authority on the calendar issue.
4. The Rabbinic calendar predisposes Messianic Jews to believe in the Catholic Friday to Sunday chronology because for the sake of illusory social unity they are unwilling to consider the actual biblical chronology which rebukes the Jewish consensus.
5. The chronological deception in Seder Olam concerning Daniel 9 cannot be unlinked from the Rabbinic Calendar. Both were created by Rabbinic authority. Biblical chronology depends on a correct definition of the new moon. What the Rabbinic calendar does is deny Messianic Jews the proper awareness of the biblical chronology and the definition of the new moon that goes with it.
6. The Rabbinic calendar and the chronology that goes with it, including the Rabbinic year of the world, is devoid of any valid apologetical use in support of Messiah’s fulfilment of biblical appointed times.
7. Most Messianic Jewish leadership is misleading most Messianic Jews on these matters. They promote the “authority” of leadership by taking the title of Rabbi, and emphasizing highly credentialed education levels. However, authority and education do not improve the chances that they will teach the whole truth. It only shows they are intelligent enough to understand the truth, but the heart is swayed by other concerns than facts and evidence. The result of maitaining Rabbinic calendar errors is that the sheep are greatly harmed and also left with inadequate defenses in support of Messiah.

The Year

There are several beginning points for the year:

1. Aviv 1: Beginning of the lunar year.
2. Spring Tequfah (equinox): Beginning of the solar year
3. Tishri 1: Beginning of agricultural year. This was thoroughly proven in a previous paper, and is not relevant to the dispute between the Rabbis and the Karaites.

There are two basic opposing systems of determining the start of a year:

1. The Rabbinic system defines the spring equinox as the beginning of the solar year, and it mandates that the spring equinox must fall before the 16th day of the first month, and also that the year should not be delayed so that the equinox falls before the 16th day of Adar, the last month of the old year.
2. The Karaite system defines Aviv 1 as the beginning of the year, and rejects the cycle of the sun for a role in determining the year. They assign barley observations as the determining criteria for Aviv 1. If barely meeting certain arbitrary specifications is discovered on or before the new moon, then that new moon is declared Aviv 1.

In this case, the Rabbinic system is essentially the biblical one, and may be demonstrated to be so by exposing the flaws in the Karaite system. I will refer to it now as the biblical system. There are a few minor differences between the biblical system and the Rabbinic theory of determining the year, and some more serious differences in implementation of the theory. For now we will stick to the theory and not the implementation.

1. The biblical system does not deny that Aviv 1 is the beginning of the lunar year. Rather it accepts the existence of a differently determined solar year, just as both Karaite and Rabbinic scholars accept a differently determined agricultural year. In other words, acceptance of the solar year does not mean the lunar year is wrong, just as the lunar year does not imply the agricultural year is wrong.
2. The biblical system does not deny that ripe barley should be located and found for the purposes of the wave offering. But it does deny that this should be done for the purpose of determining which new moon is the first month.
3. The Karaite argument uses Deut. 16:1 as its proof text, which it interprets as follows, “Observe the new moon of the green-ears .....” There are several serious flaws in this argument: (1) the word HODESH in context does not mean “new moon.” Rather, it means “month.” One only has to finish the verse to see this. Obviously the Passover was not on the new moon day. (2) the translation of Ha-Aviv as “the green ears,” although based on etymology is misleading. Sometimes the definite article is included with the month name, such as Ha-Ethanim for the seventh month (cf. 1 Kings 8:2), which by etymology means “the ever flowing streams.” The meaning of month names need have no more significance than a normal characterization of the month, and the inclusion of the def. article in the month name appears to be part of the month name. (3) The word “observe” is more easily taken to mean observing all the appointed times in the month rather than barley at the beginning of it. (4) Barley is not mentioned in Genesis 1:14-18, where the sun and moon are presented as adequate signs for days, appointed times, and years.
4. Even if we accord some validity to the to the Karaite argument, “Observe the month of the green ears” is a valid translation, rather than, “new moon of the green ears.” It may therefore be supposed that finding the barley is ripe at any time before the 16th of the month would also be valid for the month, rather than having to find it before or on the new moon day.
5. So far as I have seen, barley always appears to be ripe before the spring equinox in any case, and in those years where a barley “determination” has disagreed with the equinox, by coming later, it has been by only one party of barley searchers. Other searchers have found barley earlier in those years. It is apparent that the late party does not accept the report of the early party, and it appears that the bottom line division on this is between religious Jews that do not believe in Messiah and those who do, with those who do being correct more times. The Jews that do not believe in Messiah appear to be suppressing the reports of those who do! The conclusion is that the equinox alone will predict when barley will be seen: very accurately before it.
6. The recurrent phrase ”year to year” (cf. Exodus 13:10) in scripture is actually the words “days to days.” This implies that the underlying definition of “year” is so many days, and this is in fact more correct for the solar year, there being 366 or 365 days to calculate its recurrence. The phrase occurs in the context of Passover, which is in the spring. See also 1 Sam. 2:19 (YLT); 2 Chron. 21:19 (YLT); 1 Sam. 20:6.

7. The biggest flaw in the Karaite denial of a role for the sun: By sheer logic no other definition of a year would exist without the sun. Therefore, the prime definition of a year is one circuit of the sun through the seasons. All other definitions are secondary, such as the lunar year or agricultural year. Somehow the “light” of the sun and moon has to be a sign for seaons, days, and years. One of these lights logically has to be the sign for the year, either it is the light of the moon or the light of the sun. If it is the light of the sun, then the Karaites are disproved. If it is the light of the moon that is the “sign” for the year, then it is not barley that is the sign. And again the Karaite argument is disproved. All that remains is the the tequfat of the sun. The light returns to the same point on its circuit in the spring (cf. 1Sam. 1:20-21, YLT).

Practical Implementation

The Rabbinic theory of the year is not flawed. It’s implementation is. It uses an outdated calculated equinox. The solution is to update it with fresh observations. When the visible sun (to the naked eye) sets west or just north of west, then it is the first day of the new solar year.

Moral Failing and Motivation

Why has the day, the month, and the year in the biblical calendar become corrupted with so many? There are two fundamental reasons (1) Rejection of the Torah, (2) Rejection of Messiah. The first reason is the fault of the Church. The second the fault of Judaism. The day is confused for both reasons. Judaism switched to an evening only definition of day after the second Temple was destroyed. This definition is good for holy days, but this makes it difficult to explain the third day in relation to Messiah, because the third day follows the pattern of the daily offering. The change of the definition of the new moon makes it impossible to confirm the Passion dates. The controversy over the year likewise makes it more difficult to arrive at objective Passion dates by introducing the vagaries of human decisions for the years in question. All of these elements make it difficult to arrive an an objective biblical chronology.

But if we reverse all these mistakes, biblical chronology harmonizes!