Featured Where is this other Jewish Calendar?

One cannot cite what is not there.

The Bible simply does not state the date Tiberius started his reign. You have to accept history (something you reject) to determine the 15th year.

But we can turn to history and reference the Annals of Tacitud, Suetpnius, the record of Velleius Paterculus, and Cassius Dio to know of Tiberius' reign.

 

The only historical documents are listed in my last post. The last was actually a couple of centuries after Tiberius (we have 4 historical documents to reference and one a couple of centuries later).

Some commentators do adjust Tiberius' reign to fit a determined timeline. BUT their math adds up (yours doesn't).

The theory they use is Tiberius must have ruled jointly for a couple of years before his official reign. The problem with that there is it lacks historical evidence (it was developed to explain how Luke's timeline differs from theirs).

 

@37818

The problem with ignoring history, historical records, and historical practices because they are not in the Bible while trying to place the crucifixion as a historical event is all you end up doing is making the crucifixion a myth.

For example, when we want to understand the Jewish zeal for a Messiah and their expectations we look at the outlook of the Hasmonean period and Judaism in the early Roman Empire.

The Bible does not speak of this time (it picks up with Jesus). But a lot is explained regarding the Jewish attitudes by reading history.


Likewise, if you want to understand why Jewish sects killed the Passover on 13 Nisan while the Temple (and in Jerusalem) it was primarily 14 Nisan you have to read history and understand their reasoning and divisions).

You can't just turn to Exodus because Exodus dies not speak of the 1st century.

Did you know that priests were not involved in family Pasdover sacrifices by the 1st century? This is not what was practiced in Exodus.

How do we know this? Historical records and commentaries.

 

Augusta would have been 75 years old. He had named Tiberius as his successor (earlier).

The coin is not historic evidence of a co-reign. If anything, it solidified Augusta's choice. There were also statues from 10 AD of Tiberius. That doesn't mean he was a co-ruler.

 

Now that makes sence. I had failed to consider the XV or inscription.


Tiberius assumed the office of tribune in 4 BC. 15 years later would be 12 AD. The coin was in circulation in 13 AD.

This is not a co-rulership coin.

The front is Augustine. It reads "
Caesar Augustus, son of the divine, father of the nation."

The back is Tiberius. It reads "Tiberius Caesar, son of Augustus, holder of tribunician power for the 15th time."

It is a 1 denarius coin that was in circulation from 13AD to 14AD.


The coin shows the ruler (Augustus) and his senior military officer (Tiberius) in celebration of Tiberius' 15 years over the Roman military.. There were also statues of Tiberius from this time celebrating his military leadership.



Information about this coin can be found at the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World at New York University (online).

 

FIY....I want one but can't find any sellers.

 

The Biblical Hebrew Calendar with 1st century customs is the best we have.

But that doesn't give us a factual conversion to the Julian Calendar because we do not know that 31-33 AD started when it should have by calculating lunar cycles.


Here is how the week woukd look:

Thursday afternoon (beginning of Nisan 13 per Galilean custom) - Jesus is traveling to Jerusalem, the Passover is sacrificed in the evening (afternoon), Jesus arrives when evening had come (sundown - Nisan 14) and eats the meal. Jesus is arrested at night.

Friday morning, Nisan 14, Jesus is tried, crucified around 3pm as the Passover is being sacrificed (Judean custom, evening of Nisan 14), and buried in a nearby tomb because the next day was the Sabbath and Passover).

Saturday is Nisan 15, a "high day" and the Sabbath.

Jesus rises on the 3rd day (Saturday after sundown to early Sunday morning before light.


That is the Biblical calendar for the crucifixion week, converted to Julian days.

How it fits in terms of years is unknowable because they used the Biblical Hebrew Calendar.

But using the post-Talmudic Hebrew (the calendar that calculates lunar cycles) is the best we can do. This gives us 33AD.

It isn't factual for the date, but it is as close as we can come because dating then was based on events or lunar cycles adjusted ad hoc.

 

Actually it does have a basis.

The reason was that the sect observed Passover at the beginning of Nisan 14.

This time is called "twilight" (the time between day and night). This is the time they were told to kill the Passover.

I use Nisan 13 because you seem to consider Nisan 14 to starting at sunset rather than twilight. It was late afternoon on Thursday (still light).

But to these Jews it was the start of Nisan 14 "twilight". Jesus had a short walk, and plenty of time to make it before "evening had come".

The other sect observed Passover at the end of Nisan 14.

The difference is not really Nisan 13 vs Nisan 14 (both meet the OT requirement here) but Nisan 14 vs Nisan 15.

Jesus ate the Supper on the night starting Nisan 14. He was crucified on the afternoon that the Temple sacrificed the Passover. He was buried before the Sadducees started the meal (Nisan 15).


To prevent meaningless disagreement going forward I'll simply say "twilight beginning Nisan 14". I was just trying to keep from confusing you.

For a better Julian day outline:

Thursday around 5 pm (twilight beginning 14 Nisan) Jesus was going to Jerusalem and sent disciples ahead. This is the time the Jews who observed Passover at the start of Nisan 14 were killing the animals.

Jesus arrived when evening came. This was around 6:19 pm Thursday (Nisan 14). Jesus ate the Supper, was arrested at night, tried that morning, and crucified that afternoon.

Nisan 14 is the day Jesus died on the Cross. This is also the Preperation Day for the Judean Passover (they observed the Passover 14 Nisan as well, but at its end). The next day was the Sabbath and also a "high day".

Jesus arose on the 3rd day (Nisan 16).

 

Yes. It would be.

Not Nisan 13 but 13/14 vs 14/15. That is, during g the "/". Beginning or end of Nisan 14. Two different sects. Two different times. Same history.

The first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, would be twilight at the start od Nisan 14 as opposed to 3 pm the afternoon of Nisan 14.

Those were the two times the Passover was killed.

But by your counting this would be 13 Nisan because it was at twilight (before it was dark).


I'll try to find a chart for you. I had one once showing the differences between how the two observed Passover times.

But basically one sect killed the Passover at twilight beginning Nisan 14 and the other sect at the end of Nisan 14.

You cannot tell us which sect Mark was speaking of.

I actually can because of John's comments and because of what Mark would have observed.

 

@37818

From what I gather all you are saying is which Jewish sect you would agree with.

I do not believe this is helpful to estimating a timeline for the crucifixion.

Even if you think the Galilean Jews Mark would have observed killing the Passover at twilight starting 14 Nisan were wrong that does not change the historical fact that Mark would have observed it occuring (and it would have been his own tradition as he was not a Judean).

I am more concerned with Biblical history - with what occurred - than I am in forming an opinion about which Jewish sect most accurately followed the letter of the Law.

The reason is we already know the Pharisees were more liberal in their interpretation (even to the point they elevated their tradition to the level....sometimes above the level....of Scripture)

 

So per history:

Jews killed the Passover at twilight (beginning of Nisan 14).

Jesus was traveling to Jerusalem at this time.

Jesus was crucified around the time Jews were sacrificing the Passover (end of Nisan 14).

This accounts for the two distinct Jewish practices in the 1st century AD.