Reasons To Reject The Jewish Calculated Calendar

For Scheduling God's Holy Days

 

1. Sacred, schmacred!

The Jewish scholars and rabbis who developed and modified their calculated calendar acknowledge that it was developed by men and was never part of the instructions given to Moses.
"There is . . . unimpeachable evidence from the works of writers with expert knowledge of the calendar that the present ordo intercalationis [sequence of intercalated (13th month) years] and epochal molad [first conjunction of creation] were not yet intrinsic parts of the calendar of Hillel II, these being seen still side by side with other styles of the ordo intercalationis and the molad as late as the 11th century. Also the four dehiyyot [rules of postponements] developed gradually." [See Footnote (1) for source.]

Notice that this says more than one calendar was in use as late as the 11th cent. AD.

"As in the case of all other calendars, the Jewish calendar as now observed is the product of a long historical development." (3)

"The [Jewish calendar] evolved over a period of many centuries, going through a number of formulations, much experimentation, and a great deal of controversy." (4)

"Many were the "model" calendars presented to the Sanhedrin by the scientific-minded among the Sages. Rabbi Akiba attempted to draw up a uniform lunar calendar during the early portion of the second century C.E. by intercalating or adding, an extra month, thus making for a "leap year of thirteen months. This idea of a leap year almost caused a disastrous schism between the Jews of Judea and those of Babylonia. The quarrel was extremely passionate and lasted for a whole generation."
"There were still other notable attempts at calendar-making. The Babylonian savant, Mar Samuel (c. 165-250), of the Academy of Nehardea, wrote several astronomical treatises on the calendar. He reckoned the length of the solar year at 365 days and 6 hours; his Rabbinic colleague, Adda ben Ahava (b. 183) who followed Ptolemaic notions, placed it at 365 days, 5 hours, 55 minutes, and 25/57 seconds."(4)

2. They observed, and then calculated that it would be temporary.

The Jewish histories show that observation was used prior to calculations. When calculations first became available, they were used only to confirm the observations. This would have continued except that the Roman rulers limited all national activities in order to suppress Jewish nationalism and repeated rebellions. The publishing of the calculations was intended to be a temporary solution, not a permanent one. The Jews still intend to abandon the calculations and return to observations as soon as a new Sanhedrin can be convened in Jerusalem, especially since it has become obvious in the past century that their calendar contains errors which are causing the Holy Days to fall outside the commanded seasons in some years (e.g. 1997, 2000, 2005, 2008,).

Very little documentation exists about the procedures for observing and proclaiming the Holy Days until "the 2nd cent. C.E., when a description is given of the traditional practice. It ran as follows: On the thirtieth day of the month a council would meet to receive the testimony of witnesses that they had seen the new moon. If two trustworthy witnesses had made deposition to that effect on that day, the council proclaimed a new month to begin on that day, that is, the day on which the testimony was given became the first day of the new month instead of the thirtieth day of the old month. If no witnesses appeared, however, the new moon was considered as beginning on the day following the thirtieth." (3).

"It was not until after Christianity had become dominant in the Roman Empire, and the Christian rulers forbade the Jewish religious leadership to proclaim leap years or to communicate with the Jews outside of the empire, that it was determined to abandon the method of official proclamation of months and years and to fix the calendar in permanent form." (3).

"For centuries, during the time of the Second Temple, the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem had held the sole religious authority to proclaim the beginning of the month when two astronomers, called "witnesses," testified that, with their own eyes, they had observed the crescent moon in the sky." (4).

"At first it was in the hands of the Sanhedrin to decide annually whether the year was to be a common year or a leap-year; and the decision was based on direct observation as to the signs of spring. In course of time, calculation was in this case also substituted for observation; and the sequence of common years and leap-years as permanently fixed." (9)

3. The availability of a calculated calendar, in their own words.

Jewish scholars acknowledge that a calculated calendar was not available until the 3rd cent. AD, and then it was only used to compare with the observations.
"Rabbi Akiba attempted to draw up a uniform lunar calendar during the early portion of the second century C.E. by intercalating or adding, an extra month, thus making for a "leap year of thirteen months. This idea of a leap year almost caused a disastrous schism between the Jews of Judea and those of Babylonia." (4)

Mar Samuel, the Babylonian astronomer [165-250 AD], sent to the Palestinian Patriarch R. Johanan an astronomic computation of the Jewish calendar for 60 years in advance, refraining from making it public only so as not to interfere with the prerogatives of the patriarch. (5)

"The Jewish calendar evolved over a long period of time and is not, in its present form, an old one. The original calendar was probably primarily lunar and based on observation rather than calculation. Some time during the 7th century B.C., intercalary months began to be used to adjust the lunar year to the solar one, but they were used sporadically, and it was not until the 4th century A.D. that the calendar became fixed." (6)

[Note that although it (may have) become "fixed" as in "not by observation", the calculations underwent modifications until the 9th cent.]

4. The use of a calculated calendar, in their own words.

The Jewish scholars tell us that a fixed, calculated calendar was not officially used in lieu of observations until at least 359 AD.
"After the crushing of the revolt of the Jews against the emperor Gallus and his commander Ursicinus in 351-52 CE, . . ." "The Roman government aspired to limit the privileges of the nasi and the freedom of action of the Sanhedrin [actually the Beth Din, a scribal court. The Sanhedrin was abolished in 70 AD] in Tiberias [in Samaria, not Jerusalem]." "Hillel II agreed in principle to limit the authority of the nasi and his functions in connection with the proclamation of the New Moon, the fixing of the festivals, and the intercalation of the year. He thereupon published Sod ha-Ibbur ("The Secret of Intercalation") and Keviuta de-Yarha ("The Fixing of the New Month")." (2)

The modern Jewish calendar is not the one used by Mar Samuel in the 3rd cent. AD.
"The calculation of conjunctions, for instance, cannot have been finally established even as late as A.D. 776, for, according to the Baraitha of Samuel, the conjunction of Tishri in that year took place as 4 d. 0 h.; while, according to the modern reckoning, it did not occur til 4 d. 3 h. 363 p. This fact is of great importance in the history of the Jewish calendar (cf. Bornstein, loc. cit.)." (7)

It is also of great importance to keep in mind when considering the attempts of some modern ministers to use the modern calendar to "prove" the date of Christ's crucifixion or to "prove" that the current calendar was in use at that time. Since the calculation values and methods were changed at unknown times to an unknown degree, periodically over the course of 600-1,500 years (5th cent. BC or 4th cent. AD to 10th cent. AD), it is impossible to calculate backwards to any previous date which had been derived using a more primitive and more erroneous version of the calculations.

5. "One witness" in Judiasm is like "close" in horseshoes (Deu. 19:15, Mat. 18:16, 26:59-60).

Jewish historians tell us that Hai Gaon's (1038 AD) "tradition" of Hillel II's publishing a calendar is an unprovable opinion.

"But the tradition [of Hai Gaon regarding Hillel II] which stands quite alone, is confronted with grave objections." (7)

An earlier sole attempt by Gaon Saadya b. Joseph al-Fayyumi (892-942 AD) was labeled "an absurd theory" by his peers, the leading Jewish scholars of his time.

"It was an easy matter for the Karaites to quash this theory by means of data from the Talmud (cf.Poznanski, JQR x. 271; also The Karaite Literary Opponents of Saadiah Gaon, London, 1908, passim), and the majority of Rabbinical authorities had likewise to admit that Saadya's contentions were absurd." (7).

The Gaon's "absurd" claim is sometimes taken out of context and offered as "proof" of the antiquity of the calculated calendar. (8)

6. If they had any calculated postponements, they postponed their use.

Jewish writings agree with secular history that calculated postponements were not used until after the Talmudic period ended (c. 500 AD). The Talmud, the official record of all oral traditions as of about 500 AD, contains no mention of postponements or of any intercalary cycle, including any 19-year cycle, or months with fixed lengths, all of which are necessary for any kind of fixed calculations.

"The supposed calendar [of Hillel II] is never referred to in the Talmud, which received its final redaction at the end of the 5th cent. A.D. Nothing whatever is said there about the length of the month or the nineteen-year cycle, or anything else of the kind."
"Moreover, from the early post-Talmudic age we have dates which cannnot be reconciled with the regular calendar in use today." (7)

[Note that "calculated postponements" is not the same as "periodic intercalation" which was used with observation.]

7. "New and Improved, with the Metonic Cycle Added!"

Jewish scholars document the earliest use of the 19-year time cycle [an absolute requirement for an (almost) accurate perpetual calendar] was sometime after 500 AD. Some Jews did not accept it until the 14th cent. AD, and then only for areas far from Jerusalem. The Greek astronomer, Meton, discovered this lunar cycle in 440-432 BC. so it obviously was not in use prior to his time. Some of the Jews in Egypt didn't use it until the 17th cent. AD. (7)

"The Assuan Papyri yield ample proof of the fact that at the time after the Exile (c.585-356 BC) no such fixed cycle [an intercalary cycle of 19 years] was in use among the Jews, and this would appear to be true also of the Talmudic period."(which closed about 500 AD).

"Explicit mention of the nineteen-year cycle is first made in post-Talmudic writings (see below). Footnote: "In reference to the calendar of the Assuan Papyri, see Schurer and Ginzel in Th Lxxxii. (1907), nos. 1 and 3; Butesman, REJ liii. (1907) 194; Bornstein, The Chronological Data of the Assuan Papyri [in Heb.], Warsaw, 1909; and Westberg, Die bibl. Chronologis nach Flavius Josephus, Leipzig, 1910, p. 103 ff." (7)

8. First they looked, then they calculated.

According to Jewish historians and scholars, the earliest observance of God's Holy Days was by observation, hence the visible first crescent was the "new moon" and the first day of the month.
(1), (3), (4), (7), (9)
The Jewish calculations are based on the "mean" conjunction of the moon with the sun in relation to the earth. The conjunction occurs at high noon at a different location on the earth each month. As the Jews acknowledge, "it is invisible". (1)

If the conjunction occurs west of your location, but not across the international date line from you, then it is possible to see the first crescent on the evening of the same day, hence the calculated day and the observed day would be the same "Roman" day but not the same "Hebrew" day (sunset to sunset).
However, if the conjunction occurs at high noon at your location, you cannot see the first crescent until 30 hours later. Your "first day" would not begin at your next sunset, six hours later, but at the second sunset, 6 + 24=30 hours later. Your calculated "first day" would be one day earlier than the "observable" first day. The earliest anyone has seen the first crescent is 15.5 hours after "mean" conjunction (17). Keep in mind that the actual conjunction can be up to 14 hours before or after the "mean" conjunction, depending upon the time of year. (1)

In addition , even the true conjunction will precede the first crescent by 18 to 72 hours. (1)

9. The "molad" is their conjunction, more or less.

Jewish scholars explain that they do not use the actual conjunction, since that varies and is not convenient to use. They use the "mean conjunction" which they acknowledge "in Tishri" can be up to "six to seven hours" before the "true conjunction" and as much as "14 hours" after the "true conjunction". This means that their calculated date may vary from the actual by being one day earlier or later. (1)
Once again, even the true conjunction may precede the first crescent by 18 to 72 hours. (1)

Something to keep in mind in reading Jewish materials on the subject of the calendar is that some writers seem to lose sight of the differences between the "molad", the "mean" conjunction, the true conjunction, the visible first crescent and the "new moon", sometimes using these terms as if they are interchangeable.

10. If the sun isn't down by 6 PM, that's not their problem.

"For ritual purposes, e.g., in reckoning the times fixed for prayers or the commencement and termination of the Sabbath, the day is deemed to begin at sunset or at the end of *twilight, and its 24 hours (12 in the day and 12 in the night ) are "temporary" hours varying in length with the respective length of the periods of light and darkness. But in the reckonings of the molad the day is the equatorial day of 24 hours of unvarying length and is deemed to commence at 6 p.m. [regardless of the actual position of the sun]." (1).

Rule two of the postponements states that if the conjunction occurs after 12 noon, Tishri 1 is "delayed" by one or two days "for an astronomical reason". The "assumption" or "reason" being that when the true conjunction occurs at your location at noon or later, you cannot see the visible first crescent the same evening. But the true conjunction never occurs at the same spot on earth twice in a row. When it occurs at a point 6 to 7 hours or more, west of your location, the first crescent may be visible at your location. This rule, in effect, assumes that the conjunction is always over Jerusalem. Because of the variations in cycles, it is impossible to determine in advance the exact point on earth of the conjunction. Because the visible illumination is a matter of angle more than a matter of time, this rule shows an ignorance of or a disregard for astronomical principles.

The conjunction moves east by approximately 12 hours 44 minutes each month. So from one month to the next, it occurs almost exactly on the opposite side of the world. It takes about 15 months before the conjunction occurs within two hours of the same location. It takes about 236 lunations for the conjunction to occur at the same location which is why the calculations use the 19-year cycle for calculations. However astronomers now know that this cycle loses one day every 312 years.

Rule two is unnecessary at least 75% of the time, but no exceptions are allowed in its implementation. Rule two assumes that the conjunction always occurs directly over Jerusalem. This assumption is in the same category as a "flat earth" being the "center of our solar system".
The early Jewish astronomers may have mistakenly assumed this. The alternative is that they knowingly allowed or perpetrated a hoax in order to present a calendar that appeared to work.

11. Jewish "new year" is not God's commanded "first month", even if you count backwards.

All Jewish writings confirm that their calendar is based upon establishing Tishri 1 (the civil new year) after which they count backwards to determine Abib (Nisan) 1 as the first day of their "religious calendar". (1), (3), (4), (7), (9).
They never refer to either one as a "sacred calendar". Tishri begins the seventh month according to God's instructions (Ex. 12, Lev. 23), which included counting forwards.

12. Showing up sooner or later for God's "moed" (appointed time).

According to Jewish scholars, non-atmospheric factors which can affect the date of a visible first crescent include the "interval from the true conjunction to the ensuing sunset(s) [at your location], the season of the year, the lunar latitude, and the geographical longitude and latitude of the place of observation." "In the region of Jerusalem" . . . "the minimum interval from the true conjunction to the phasis (first crescent) is approx. 18 hours, while the maximum is close to 72 hours". (1)
This says the calculated date could be as much as three days earlier than the true date. As the Jews admit, "Rosh Ha-Shanah [Heb. "new year"; also Feast of Trumpets, Lev. 23, Num. 29] may commence nearly 18 hours before the moment of the molad [conjunction]. . .or more than 38 hours after the moment of the molad (depending upon which rules of postponements are involved)".
This Jewish article states, "Rosh HaShanah does, of course, occasionally occur before the day of the phasis begins, or, in some extremely rare cases, on the day immediately after the phasis, . . . such oscillation is inherent in a system, like the present Jewish calendar, based on mean values." (1)

13. Variation from "true" is the rule.

A year-by-year comparison between dates calculated and those set by observation, shows the calculated dates to vary about 60% of the time. Variation seems to be the rule rather than the exception.
"Note: In more than 60% of all years Rosh Hashanah does not occur on the day of the Molad but is postponed to one of the Dehioth. Therefore the Dehioth are actually not the exceptions to the rule but the rule...". (10)

14. Incorrect lunation cycle.

Jewish scholars readily point out that their calculations use a lunation cycle of 29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes, 3 1/3 seconds. This "slightly exceeds the present astronomically correct value (29d. 12h. 44m. 2.841 secs.). This discrepancy is constantly increasing by a very small figure, owing to the secular acceleration of the mean lunar motion." (1)
In other words, they used incorrect data and due to the fact that the moon is currently speeding up in it's cycle, the error in their calculations is also increasing.

"This makes a difference in a hundred cycles (1900 years) of 8 days, 21 hours, 45 minutes, and 5 seconds ("Tables du Calendrier Juif," p. 6, Paris, 1886)." (9)

Because of the Jewish belief that a Sanhedrin (actually a Beth Din) "tradition" should not or can not be changed except by another (Great Court) Sanhedrin, the calculations will continue to be based on incorrect figures.

15. A "mean" moon assumed.

Jewish writers on the subject of the calendar admit that their calendar may never have been correct.
"Nor can it be ascertained when, if ever, the moment of the molad was identical with the moment of the mean conjunction since, because of the great many inequalities in the moon's movement in longitude, it is practically impossible to fix the mean position of the moon at any time." (1)

16. Jerusalem time assumed.

Jewish scholars also admit that the concept that their calendar is based on Jerusalem time is just an assumption. "Moreover, it is no more than an assumption (no less difficult to prove than to disprove) that the occurrences of the molad are expressed in the terms of local Jerusalem time." (1)

17. A "mean" season.

One aspect of God's instructions was to keep his feast days "in season" (Ex. 13:3-10 and Deu. 16:1-6). Seasons are determined by the vernal and autumnal equinox and the summer and winter solstice. These periods are not equal and vary in length. For their calculations the Jews used a "mean" length.
"The mean length of the seasons, . . . was reckoned by Mar Samuel (c. 165-254, head of the academy at Nehardea in Babylon) at 91 days 7 1/2 hours. Hence, with his solar year of 365d. 6h. or 52 weeks and 1 1/4 days--identical with the Julian year--the tekufot [seasons] move forward in the week, year after year, by 1 1/4 days."
"The frequent occurrence, in the last centuries, of Passover (Nisan 15-21) [falling] prior to the day of Mar Samuel's tekufah of Nisan [winter solstice] --whereas the purpose of intercalation [adding a 13th lunar month to the Jewish calendar] is to avoid the tekufah of Tevet [winter solstice] extending to Nisan 16 [day after Passover, Nisan 14/15](RH 21a) --is held by some scholars to show that in the making of the present Jewish calendar Mar Samuel's value was deliberately departed from, and the length of the solar year was more accurately calculated at 365d. 5h. 55min. 25 27/57secs., a calculation associated with the name of Rav Adda (perhaps Rav Adda b. Ahavah, a Babylonian amora [scholar who participated in the editing of the Talmud] of the third century.). (1)

In other words, Passover is scheduled to fall within a "mean" spring, after an arbitrarily set "mean" equinox, not the true equinox. Mar Samuel's calendar would have eventually scheduled the spring equinox to fall in summer.
Again, this shows why we cannot use the modern Jewish calendar to determine which dates, nor on which days of the week, feasts were observed by anyone prior to the 10th cent. AD.

18. What difference can six little old minutes make?

" . . . the modern estimate of the length of the tropical solar year (is) 365d. 5h. 48min. 46sec. If the average length of the solar year in the present Jewish calendar exceeds this by approximately 6 2/3 min., this discrepancy was left out of account as it was assumed that its cumulative effect would remain negligible over a long period at the end of which the present system was expected to be replaced again by a system based on true values more akin to the earlier [but not earliest] Jewish calendar in which New Moons (days of the phasis) and intercalations were proclaimed on the basis of both observation and calculation." (1)

The earliest alleged use of a calculated calendar is 359 AD. So, 2000 - 359 = 1641 years, and, 6 2/3 = 6.66 minutes. Therefore, 1641 years x 6.66 minutes = 10,929.06 minutes = 182.151 hours = 7.59 days.
Since the time of Hillel II, that 6 2/3 minutes would add up to an error of 7 1/2 days. Some writers now report the total error to be as much as 9 days.

 

Hebrew Calendar Science and Myths
by Remy Landau

The Accuracy of the Hebrew Calendar

"It is a myth to look upon the Hebrew calendar as some kind of celestial clock
capable of keeping the Jewish holidays in their season.

The accuracy of the Hebrew calendar is fixed by the value of the mean
lunation period coupled to the 19 year cycle of 235 lunar months.

That leads to an average Hebrew year length of 365.2468 days.

The mean tropical solar year is about 365.2422 days.

Hence, the average Hebrew year is slower than the average solar year by about one day in every 216 years. That means that today, we celebrate the holidays, on average about 8 days later than did our ancestors in 359g [AD] at the time that the fixed calendar rules were published.

Should no Hebrew calendar reform take place then over the next few millenia all of our holidays will have drifted out of their appropriate seasons and Pesach [Passover] could theoretically be observed in winter."

(Source: http://geocities.datacellar.net/Athens/1584/)

 

19. No human was there, but that doesn't stop them as long as the date is portable.

While not required for observation, the calculated calendar required a benchmark to work against for continually calculating future dates for God's Holy Days. About 200 years after the time of Christ, the Jewish astronomers decided upon the first molad of creation as the benchmark. Somehow they arrived at the 4th day, 20th hour, 408th part of the creation week (for calculations, hours are divided into 1080 parts, each equal to 3 1/3 secs.).
Perhaps because of changes in how the calculations are performed, or because of discovery of errors in the calculations, or because of variations in the lunar and solar cycles, or perhaps because of all of these, there have been five different dates set for that first molad: 4d. 20h. 408p; 2d. 5h. 204p.; 6d. 14h. 0p.; and 3d. 22h. 876p.. ". . .which artificially go back to the beginning of the Era of the Creation and variously place its epoch in the autumn of 3762, 3761, 3760, 3759, and 3758 BCE." (1)

"The custom of reckoning from the Creation (calculated by Jewish scholars to have taken place in the fall of 3761 B.C.E.) began to be used in the 3rd cent. C.E., grew in popularity in the Middle Ages, and is almost universal among Jews in modern times." (3)

"The imaginary conjunction is called the 'the molad of nothing' (molad tohu)." (7)

Changing the year of the benchmark is significant, because the amount of intervening time in years, directly affects the calculations. Of course, so does changing the days, hours and parts. All calculations involve additions and subtraction based directly upon the benchmark in use at the time.
True power is being able to change the date of the Creation of the world (sic).

20. If you're behind schedule in your work, simply change the schedule to show that you're on time.

"The intervals of intercalation [adding a 13th lunar month to keep Passover in spring] were at first irregular, intercalation being in part due to the prevailing state of various agricultural products and to social conditions. Regularity will also have been hampered by the Romans suppressing what they considered stirring of Jewish nationalism (Tosef., Sanh. 2:2-9, and parallels). Astronomy was, however, always a powerful factor, as the state of the crops is ultimately determined by the sun's position in its annual path. Owing to the omission of intercalation over a period of some length, R. Akiva (d.137) once intercalated three successive years as an emergency measure." (1)

He must have done this partially retroactively, otherwise 39 lunations in 36 solar months is a miracle on the scale of Joshua's "long day".
It seems that previously, the Jewish rabbis had no problem in changing their calculated calendar in their attempts to make it work. That is no longer true as the Jews today believe, upon the authority of their "traditions", that the calculated calendar must be used until a new Sanhedrin is convened in Jerusalem. This may be partially because no better perpetual calendar can be concocted than the one they presently have, with its inherent errors. It's also because the Jews believe that only a Jerusalem Sanhedrin has the authority to look at God's signs (Gen. 1:14) and to recognize the day of the lunar month (Ex. 12, Lev. 23).
This view of the importance of "tradition" is reflected in the musical "Fiddler on the Roof", in a song titled, "Tradition!"

Remember, God never commanded a perpetual calendar, nor any calendar for that matter. What he commanded was to observe and keep his Holy Days. If you were told to "observe" the winter solstice or the spring equinox every year, you wouldn't need any humanly-devised calendar. They are observable, astronomical events. You recognize the weekly "feast" or 7th day Sabbath by visually recognizing a sunset and by counting to seven. Recognizing God's schedule of his Holy Days using his appointed "signs" (sun and moon) isn't any more difficult than that.

21. According to Jewish history, there has never been universal agreement among the Jews on any form of their calculated calendar.

"The Samaritans seem to have followed the northern calendar as distinct from that of the other Jews. In Hasmonean and Herodian times [2nd Cent. BC-1st Cent. AD] the Sadducees and Boethusians each had their own calendar as did--subsequently in talmudic [2nd Cent. AD-4th Cent. AD] and post-talmudic times [after 500 AD]--the Karaites and other less well-known sects." (1)

Note that the Pharisees gained political power after the Sadducees lost favor with the monarch in 79 BC. Since most of Jewish history comes to us through the writings of the Pharisees, anyone who disagreed with them was labeled a "sect". According to Josephus, the Pharisees only numbered something over 6,000 total.(11) Labels don't always reflect numbers. The Sadducee priests numbered over 20,000 in Jerusalem alone.(12) The Essenes numbered about 4,000 probationers and initiates, but this does not include the "large number of sympathizers" who partially imitated their life style and philosophy (13) (14). This means that the Pharisees were the smallest of all the groups. That they were a minority is reflected in Mat. 14:1-5, 21:45-46, Jn. 7:31-32, Mk. 11:18, 27-33, 12:12-13, Lk. 20:19, 22:2. Nevertheless, they controlled the synagogues as seen in Jn. 9:13-22. Notice that the term "Jews" here refers only to the minority Pharisees.

Today the Karaites still use observation, resorting to calculation only when observation is impossible. They still refuse to use the postponements. (7)
The difference in calendars being used, especially in the time of Christ, helps us to better understand the timing of the events of the Crucifixion.

"Despite the fact that the Jewish calendar finally became fixed in 358 C.E., there was no end to the criticisms and disputes leveled at its inaccuracies for centuries thereafter. Among its critics were the illustrious scientist-doctor Isaac Israeli (North Africa, ninth century) and the foremost religious authority of the age, Saadia Gaon (Babylonia, tenth century). Many corrections were offered subsequently, but there was no unanimity among them. It is evident that there must have been a basic error somewhere in the computation." (4)

22. A "13th [lunar] month" is like a third wheel on a bicycle. Sometimes you may see one, but it doesn't have to affect your schedule.

The Jews didn't invent the "13th lunar month". They attempted to invent a perpetual lunar/solar calendar to temporarily schedule Holy Days only until a new Sanhedrin could be convened in Jerusalem. Previous to 70 AD, the Jews had not been absent from Jerusalem except for a period of 52 years (588 BC - 536 BC). They had no way of knowing that they would be cut off from the Temple mount for nearly 2.000 years.
The lunar and solar cycles do not correspond in even numbers. In one solar year, the difference is about 11 lunar days. So in three solar years, the accumulated difference is about one lunar month. This is an observable phenomena of our solar system as created by God.
The Holy Days fall from the first month until the seventh month every year. There is no cumulative aspect to the Holy Days schedule. The first lunar month is identified in relation to the winter solstice. When you recognize the first month, the length of the year, whether in solar days or in lunar days is irrelevant to scheduling the Holy Days.
The 13th lunar month is a problem only if you attempt to construct an error-free perpetual calendar. Astronomers say this is impossible.

"A perpetual Jewish calendar that would be serviceable in any real sense is thus out of the question." (7)

The Jewish calculated calendar contains an error, by which the regularly scheduled intercalation of a 13th month causes the Holy Days to be one month late in relation to the seasons in some years. The Jews admit this problem but see no relief from it until a new Jerusalem Sanhedrin can be convened. (1), (9)

23. When is a Sanhedrin not a Sanhedrin?

Jewish writers often compare the Sanhedrin, to the group of 70 elders that assisted Moses in judging Israel during the 40 years in the Wilderness. Some non-Jewish ministers refer to this body as a link in an alleged unbroken chain of authority from Moses to the present day ministry.

There are some problems with this concept.
Moses' group of "elders" were not priests. They were the heads of families from all 12 tribes. The Levite priests taught the law. The "elders" judged matters among the people. This group assisted Moses until he was replaced by Joshua. After Joshua led the people in conquering Palestine, the tribes separated. According to the Jews, there was no equivalent body from Joshua until (supposedly) the time of Ezra. Later, according to Josephus, the Greeks (Seleucids, c. 312-) permitted a body known as the gerousia ('senate') which was made up of elders and represented the nation. The Romans at first, also allowed this body to exercise wide powers, but as they felt forced to tighten control over Judea to prevent rebellion, the court's powers were diminished. In the time of Christ, they had no authority over Galilee. (15)

According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin most likely originated as a result of the incompetency of certain of the High Priests after the rule of Simon the Just (300-291 BC). (18) There were many sanhedrins known locally as gerousia or boule (council). Any community could have one. Depending on the population, the court numbered from 7 to 23 men. The "Great Court" in Jerusalem had 23 members (although members could be added temporarily to break tie votes, up to a max. of 70). Originally, the members were Levitical priests, but Herod, in order to strengthen his political standing, forced the court to include Pharisees and scribes (lawyers). (Another reason the number may have increased at times from 23 to 70.)

According to the Jewish Talmud, another court was the "Beth Din" which was composed only of scribes. It existed as early as 68 AD, two years before the Destruction of the Temple and the abolishment of the "Great Court" or Sanhedrin of Jerusalem. During the lifetime of Christ, this Sanhedrin had extensive powers, with "the internal government of the country being in its hands". The Talmud treats the Beth Din as a continuation of the Sanhedrin but it was essentially different, being composed only of scribes whose decisions had only moral and religious authority. It is recorded that the Beth Din met at different times in different locations (all outside of Jerusalem) including Tiberias in 193-220. (1), (15). Later Jewish writers copy the Talmud's error in calling the Beth Din, a sanhedrin.

If Hillel II was the first to publish the calculated calendar, and if he did that in 359, then he published it from Tiberias which is in Samaria. And he published it without benefit of a Sanhedrin, and perhaps without even the backing of a Beth Din. Hillel II was not a High Priest, but a nasi, the head of a Beth Din (a scribal court of lawyers). The Levitical priesthood ended with the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. (2), (16).
"After the crushing of the revolt of the Jews against the emperor Gallus and his commander Ursicinus in 351-52 C.E., which resulted in the destruction of many Jewish communities (Sepphoris, Tiberias, Lydda), new decrees were issued against the internal authority of the communities, and also against the observance of Judaism. The Roman government aspired to limit the privileges of the nasi and the freedom of action of the Sanhedrin [sic] in Tiberias." (2)
If the Jewish community in Tiberias was destroyed in 351-52, and the only record of a Beth Din in Tiberias is 193-220, then the tradition of Hillel II publishing a calendar from there in 358-59 becomes suspect. This "tradition" is based solely on the testimony of Hai Gaon in the 11th cent., 700 years after the fact.

 

24. "The first shall be last and the last shall be first." (The Jews borrow from the NT.)

"If the month is of thirty days, the first two days are thus observed; if it has but twenty-nine, the last day of the preceding month is the first day of the new month." (3)

This prevents the current month from having two "first" days, and 28 remaining, but it makes the previous month 29 instead of 30 and ignores the actual length of the month based on the visible phase.

This would make no difference to anyone else except for two things. For convenience of calculations, the length of each month is determined in advance regardless of the actual lunar cycle. If you use the Jewish calendar but do not observe two days, you may still be one day too early or too late (assuming the calculations were otherwise correct.)
In addition, the date of Pentecost depends upon counting 50 consecutive days. When some months are given preset lengths and the actual lengths are ignored, it affects the date of Pentecost.
Conservative and Orthodox Jews, outside of Israel, observe two days for each of God's Holy Days (except for Atonement, a day of fasting). Reform Jews observe only one day for each as prescribed in scripture.

Conclusions:

The only basis for accepting the calculated Jewish calendar is the only one which the Jewish religious community uses, that is, "Jewish tradition". That is why some Jews are confused when non-Jews decide to observe the holy days of Lev. 23 while rejecting Judaism.
The calculated calendar's earliest proposed use caused an international division between the major Jewish communities of scholars and leaders that threatened to permanently divide the Jewish people. Some Jewish groups still do not accept the postponements which are a core part of the current Jewish calendar.
It was only reluctantly accepted by a few of the Jewish religious leaders as a direct result of Roman oppression (which was in response to Jewish rebellions). The oppression was the direct result of disobedience to God's laws.
So the sequence of events was: 1) disobedience to God and his laws which resulted in, 2) temporary captivity followed by almost continuous foreign oppression (which was prophesied by, authorized by, and allowed by God), 3) repeated rebellion against the divinely-given oppression followed by, 4) proportionally increasing oppression which eventually destroyed Jerusalem, the Temple, the Sanhedrin, the Beth Din civil courts, and the proclamation of the feast days. The oppression eventually even included the prohibition of calculations anywhere in Judea.

Notice that national repentance is not found in the sequence of events.

The need for a calculated calendar was a result of the sins of Judah.
The reluctant acceptance of the calculated calendar was a result of Judah's non-repentance.

It is a human invention with an evolutionary history that demonstrates that it was not divinely given nor divinely inspired. It is perpetually erroneous and its cumulative error increases with time.
While some of its developers may have imagined noble purposes, and while its existence may have benefited some people to some extent, it was an attempt to humanly "fix" a problem that could have been divinely resolved upon human repentance.

The aspects of its history and the nature of the Jewish calendar constitute the reasons for Christians to not use it. As Christ pointed out to the Jews of the 1st cent., their "traditions" were "making of none effect", the laws of God.
[The purpose of God's laws are for man to receive blessings for obedience. When men choose human traditions over God's laws, they prohibit those blessings. God's laws cannot "effect" (or produce) blessings when man substitutes contradictory human traditions in their place.]

Finally, the intention of the Jewish religious communities to abandon the calculated calendar, because of its inherent errors, should tell us something about its lack of value.
It appears that they will not go back to observation alone, but will use a combination of observation, calculation and the state of the spring barley crops in Palestine (Lev. 23:10-11). From their own historical accounts, this is not the original method but an intermediate method adopted because of frequently unfavorable weather and outside interference by their national enemies, both of which were results of sins and non-repentance.
Until there is repentance, the blessings which included "rain in due season" will be withheld. This means that observation may be difficult at times and that "unseasonable" weather may interfere with the normal production of barley crops.
But the calculations will continue to produce different days than the "signs" provided by God, particularly when the Jews follow the "tradition" of rescheduling God's feast days in deference to their "tradition" of Friday and pre-Atonement preparation rituals. While they have publicly said that the "current" erroneous calendar will be abandoned in favor of a "previous" tradition, this has nothing to do with their other "tradition" of hallowing Friday and pre-Atonement.

All of this is of no concern to anyone except to those Christians who choose to observe the feast days as commanded by God. Most accept the calculated calendar without question. When Jewish leaders abandon it, Christian feast-observers will have to make a choice. They could continue to use it based on "Jewish tradition", or upon their own "tradition". (Some groups have already used a modified version of it for over 40 years.)
They can continue to "follow" the Jewish leaders in using a "buffet" method, although "traditionally" not all Jewish groups have agreed on a particular calendar.
Or, they could just do what God instructed in the first place, and observe days, recognizable by his "signs", and avoid "calendars" altogether.

The subject of a religious calendar is confusing to many people. It appears that this is partly because of articles written by ministers with either ignorance of the facts or malice of intent or both. Perhaps it is partly because of the perceived inconvenience of using a library and reading a book. Perhaps it is reluctance to question the honesty or understanding of other human beings who feed themselves by maintaining the status quo ("ministers" Acts 20:29-30).
It is confusing if one approaches it by attempting to understand the Jewish calendar in light of astronomy. It is confusing if one attempts to understand astronomy in light of the Jewish calendar. Or if one attempts to find a perpetual calendar in scripture.
Even the simple truth can be confusing if one tries to understand it while wearing glasses tinted with Jewish calendar problems or the anomalies of astronomy.

God created the sun, moon and stars and "designated" them as "signs" of the "seasons, days and years" (Gen. 1:14). About 2,500 years later he designated specific days to be observed as his feast days (Lev. 23:1-44). He instructed us to seek knowledge, understanding and wisdom (Pro. 1-4).
We must study to obtain the knowledge (2 Tim. 2:15). The correct understanding of truth comes not from human wisdom (1 Cor. 1:19-20) but through God's Holy Spirit which teaches us (Jn. 14:26, 16:13; 1 Cor 2:14). Wisdom is a matter of making the right choice between life and death (Deu. 30:15, 19).

Once a year, on the feast of Atonement, the High Priest was to enter into the Holy of Holies, symbolically coming before the throne of God, to make an atonement offering on behalf of all Israel (Lev. 16:1-34). If he entered on the wrong day, he would be killed and the offering would not have been accepted. For the High Priest, getting the day right was a matter of physical life or death. For the rest of Israel, it was a matter of having their atonement offering accepted and being reconciled to God.
When we observe the symbolical in place of the physical, does the penalty change?

During the time of the second Temple, so many High Priests were struck dead upon entering the Holy of Holies, that a practice was established, of tying a rope on the leg of the High Priest, so that it was easier to remove the body. One rabbi told us that this was because of the corruption of that time and many of the priests were heretics. But this is also the time when the calculations were beginning to be used. Since the corruption and heresy were year-round, it would, in view of Lev. 16, seem more likely that the divine executions were because it was the wrong day.

Some say that it doesn't really make any difference which days we observe, as long as we can have "unity". If it doesn't make any difference, why not observe the divinely-commanded days instead of the humanly-appointed days of "tradition"? After all, it was God that enforced the death penalty, not the Pharisees.

Regardless of how one approaches this subject, it still comes down to a choice.

"Choose life".

***

Sources:
(1) "Calendar", The Encyclopaedia Judaica Jerusalem, pp. 43-54, Keter Pub. House Ltd. Jerusalem, Israel, 1971.

(2) Ibid., "Hillel II", p. 486.

(3) "Calendar", The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, pp. 630-634, Univ. Jewish Ency. Inc, New York, 1940.

(4) "Calendar, Jewish", The Book of Jewish Knowledge, An Encyclopedia of Judiasm and the Jewish People, Nathan Ausbel, 1964, pp.70-71.

(5) A Social and Religious History of the Jews, Salo W. Baron, Vols. I, II, Columbia Univ. Press, 1952, p. 307.

(6) "Hebrew Calendar", The Book of Calendars, Edit. by Frank Praise, p. 12, 1982.

(7) "Calendar (Jewish)", Encyclopeaedia of Religion and Ethics, Edit. by James Hastings, Vol. III, 1971, pp.117-124.

(8) "Summary of the Hebrew Calendar, Doctrinal Study Paper", United Church of God, an Intl. Assn., 1997, p. 5.

(9) "Calendar, History of:", The Jewish Encyclopedia, Funk and Wagnalls, 1903, pp. 498-504.

(10) David B Loughran quoting from: The Comprehensive Hebrew Calendar, by Arthur Speir, pages 218-219, para 11., found at: http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/saccal/calbook/part2-6.html

(11) Antiquities of the Jews, Book 17, Ch. 2, Sect. 4, Josephus, The Works of Flavius Josephus, trans. by William Whiston, A.M., London, 1849.

(12) Against Apion, Book 2, Sect. 8, Josephus, op. cit..

(13) The Jewish Sects, IV. 37, p. 343, Almanac of the Bible, Wigoder, Paul, and Viviano, Jerusalem Pub. House, Ltd., Jerusalem, Israel.

(14) Ausebel, op. cit., pp.144-145.

(15) Sanhedrin, The Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, England, USA Tyndale, 1980, Vol. 3, pp. 1390-1.

(16) Antiquities of the Jews, Book 20, Ch. 10, Sect. 1, Josephus, op. cit..

(17) U.S. Naval Observatory, Astronomical Applications Department, at http://aa.usno.navy.mil/AA/faq/docs/islamic.html

(18) Ausebel, op. cit., pp. 388-389.

                                            Next                            Calendar Index

Copyright M.H. and G.H. 1998, 2007. All rights reserved.
Counter 1