EZEKIEL

and YHWH’s

Judgment

for the

Good News

PEOPLE

VOLUME XV

Calendar and Festivals

EZEKIEL and YHWH’s

Judgment for the

Good News People

Volume XV--Calendar and Festivals

by

an unworthy servant

And you shall know the truth,

and the truth will make you free.

(John 8:32)

Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho. The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States. Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.age-end.com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA.

Contents

Volume XV--Calendar and Festivals

CHAPTER PAGE

- Cover Page 1

- Title Page 2

- Contents 3

- Publisher’s Preface 5

Part SS--The Sabbath

217 Sunday or the Sabbath? 6

Part TT--Calendar and Times

218 Sun Worship and the Calendar 18

219 The Day 26

220 The Scriptural Calendar I 42

221 The Scriptural Calendar II 51

222 Calendar Changes and Confusion 58

223 The Jewish Calendar 74

224 Other Calendar Issues 84

Part UU--Christian Holidays Versus YHWH’s Feasts

225 Easter or Passover? 89

226 Lent, Mardi Gras and Fasching 100

227 Christmas and New Year’s Day 104

228 More Christian-Religion Holidays 110

229 Secular Holidays in Christendom 113

230 The Hebrew Festivals I 125

231 The Hebrew Festivals II 137

Part VV--Chronology

232 Overview of Scriptural Chronology 145

233 Scriptural Chronology of Adam I 151

234 Scriptural Chronology of Adam II 163

SHEERIT YISRAEL

PO Box 473

Calder, Idaho 83808, USA

Publisher’s Preface

Greetings! The following presentation is volume fifteen of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.age-end.com web site.

This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world. In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one.

Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material. It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message!

The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1. It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins: left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers).

For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope.

With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers. May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him. Shalom (peace) to you and yours!

an unworthy servant, Hanukkah 2003 CE

Chapter 217--Sunday or the Sabbath?

Sunday

In terms of the calendar and festival time themes (in the context of “set aside” [Hebrew kodesh] days), it would be well to initially reflect some on the question of Sunday in the Word since Christians often suppose that it was the resurrection day (which it was not, as outlined in a prior chapter), or that the Seventh day Sabbath was somehow changed to Sunday in the NT (which is simply not true, as will be proven in comments to follow).

In fact, many Christians try to use these allegations as support for their Sunday worship and abolishment of the Seventh day Sabbath--though both ideas are wrong!

Sabbath in the Scriptures

As a start place, it is important to observe that the Seventh day Sabbath was set apart by The CREATOR at creation (Gen 2:2-3). It is repeatedly enjoined as a day of rest and worship throughout both the OT and NT (Ex 20:8-11; 23:12; 34:21; Lev 19:3, 30; 26:2; Deut 5:12-15; Neh 9:14; Heb 4:4-10). It predates the giving of the law at Sinai (Gen 1-2; Ex 16:23-30).

Please note that the Torah sets the specific seventh day in a weekly cycle apart and not just any one day in a seven day weekly period (Ex 20:10). This is a profoundly important point to keep in mind when examining Christian practices and theology later in this and succeeding chapters.

From the standpoint of obedience by a follower of YHWH YESHUA, no explanation is needed on why the Seventh day Sabbath was formally created by The CREATOR. On the surface, it is readily apparent that a weekly day of rest is needed. The Sabbath day accomplishes this need.

Perhaps the New Testament offers the best conclusion on this when YESHUA said that the Sabbath was made for Adam (Mk 2:27). On this NT reference, the point must be made that the remark surely pertains to Adam since the KJV man in this text comes from the Greek anthropos (noted in a previous chapter, as typically meaning Adam).

Does this mean that behemah servants or work animals are not deserving of the Sabbath rest? No, the Sabbath was made for Adam. But the law stipulates that Adam is to extend this rest day to servants, slaves and behemah humanoids and work animals as well (the KJV incorrectly translates behemah to cattle in Ex 20:10--which covers this need).

Significantly, the Sabbath is a sign or mark which identifies YAH’s people (Gen 2:2-3; Ex 31:12-17; Ezek 20:12, 20). Yet, the two nations (the Houses of Yehudah and Yisrael) both despised YHWH’s set apart things and profaned His Sabbaths (Ezek 20:12-24; 22:8, 26; 23:38). Thus, breaking of the Seventh day Sabbath became one of their primary sins during the days of the divided kingdom.

Because neither House would correctly observe the Sabbath, they were both sentenced to the judgment of a conquering army and captivity. This fact was brought out by Yechezkel, as noted above, when he reported three times that both nations “polluted” YHWH’s Sabbaths (Ezek 20:12-24; 22:8; 23:38).

The House of Yisrael was divorced and taken into Assyrian bondage and Yehudah spent 70 years in Babylonian exile before being allowed to return. In the divorce, Yisrael lost The MOST HIGH’s name (discussed earlier) and her Sabbath sign of identification (Lam 2:6). Truly, the House of Yisrael became lost in terms of her own knowledge, as well as in the comprehension of others.

The Jews Learned About the Sabbath

But after correction and instruction (Neh 13:15-22), Yehudah finally learned about the Sabbath and began keeping it. In fact, in the NT environment, Yehudah was so Sabbath conscious that the Jewish leaders built an unscriptural hedge around the Sabbath (in the Talmud) to supposedly protect it from abuse, as discussed earlier.

Of course, YESHUA, Shaul and the other NT figures all kept the Seventh day Sabbath--per the prevailing custom of the people (Lu 4:16; Acts 17:2). As Dr George Lamsa notes in his “Holy Bible from Eastern Texts,” the NT says “It is therefore the duty of the people of God to keep the Sabbath” (Heb 4:9).

While some persons confuse YAH’s law on prohibiting a fire (Ex 35:3--which refers to an industrial or construction fire for work at the Tabernacle and plainly not otherwise, per Lev 6:13) and not carrying a heavy load or any load involving work (Num 15:32-36; Jer 17:19-27; Neh 13:15-22), the law is fairly simple and easy to understand.

Sunday in the Word

Actually, the weekday of Sunday seems to only appear twice in the Word in an allowable fashion. Mark “possibly” referred to it once in the NT (Mk 16:9). And in the OT, Yeshayahu alludes to it in his statement on the Sabbath (Isa 56:2-12) when he suggested that on the morrow after the Sabbath (thus, the first day or Sunday after the seventh day), evil men shall set it aside as a day of happiness and feasting.

The KJV of the Scriptures uses the expression “first day of the week” some eight times in the New Testament. In all instances, the word “day” is supplied by the translators as it is not in the actual Greek text. Otherwise, the word “week” comes from the words Sabbaton or Sabbata (which must at once suggest the weekly Sabbath).

In Mark 16:9, the word “week” comes from the Greek word Sabbaton, in the singular. In all of the other seven cases in the Greek NT, the work “week” is from the Greek Sabbata, plural of Sabbaton (“The New Englishman’s Concordance of the Greek New Testament,” p. 679).

Moreover, Mark 16:9 uses the Greek word protos (meaning “first”) for “first.” But in all of the other seven NT cases, the word “first” comes from the Greek mia which means the cardinal number “one” and not the ordinal number “first.” Thus, there are some fundamental differences between Mark 16:9 and the remaining seven expressions of the “first day of the week” in English translations of the New Testament.

Confusion?

Actually, there is no confusion on this theme if one is familiar with the Scriptures and Second Temple Judaism. The count to Pentecost (Lev 23:16) involves a count process of seven Sabbaths (or weeks) to the 50th day (as will be described in a later chapter on the Hebrew festivals). In Hebrew/Jewish mentality, this count is one of the Sabbaths (or weeks), two of the Sabbaths (or weeks) and so forth.

Therefore (literally), the Greek mia Sabbata refers to one of the Sabbaths (possibly the first Sabbath or perhaps one of the other Sabbaths) in the count to Pentecost, while protos Sabbaton (in Mk 16:9) is very plausibly the first Sabbath.

Christian translators quite often link the word Sabbath to week for protos Sabbaton at Mark 16:9, and for mia Sabbata in the other seven cases found in the NT (thereby implying the first day of the week or Sunday in all eight instances).

But there must be another explanation on both mia Sabbata and protos Sabbaton since the Greek language already has other appropriate words for day and week--like hemera for day and hepdomads (meaning sevens) for week (hepdomads is used in Classical Greek, per Colin Deal in the Dec 2002 “End Time News,” p. 1).

As Christian writer Colin Deal outlined in the Oct 2002 “End Time News” (p. 3), the “first day” in Greek should appear as “protos hemera.” In this sense, it is possible that the first day of the week is not to be found at all in the Greek NT. Maybe, protos Sabbaton means the first Sabbath in the count to Pentecost while mia Sabbata means any one of the seven Sabbaths in the count to Pentecost.

In raising a question over translating Sabbaton/Sabbata as “week” (instead of recognizing hepdomads), it must be acknowledged that it is conceivable that Sabbaton does indeed mean a week (singular), as Colin Deal points out in Luke 18:12 where a Pharisee said that he fasted twice in the week--obviously, he didn’t fast twice on the Sabbath (Dec 2002 “End Time News,” p. 3).

The essence of this presentation is that mia Sabbata probably means one of the Sabbaths (or possibly one of the weeks) and protos Sabbaton logically means either the first Sabbath or the first week--in the count to Pentecost.

Shmuel Safrai, Revisited

The New Testament also has another most interesting remark on this subject of counting (of the omer--the wave sheaf) to Pentecost. This one surfaces in Luke 6:1, where the “King James Version” refers to “the second Sabbath after the first.” Of course, there is some question about what Luke may have had in mind in such a statement.

Shmuel Safrai, Professor of Jewish History of the Mishnaic and Talmudic Period at Hebrew University, observes that the actual Greek in this text reads the “second-first Sabbath” which in Second Temple days meant the second Sabbath of the counting of the omer to Pentecost (per an article on Sabbath Breakers, appearing in the Jul/Aug 1990 “Jerusalem Perspective,” p. 3).

Other students of the Book suggest that second first Sabbath meant the second high Sabbath of the feast (days) of Unleavened Bread. This latter statement could be the same finding as Safrai’s conclusion, depending on how the Sabbath days fell during that occasion and/or whether Sabbath always meant a week or not.

Ridiculous Christian Arguments

Yet, many Christians ignorantly try to argue that the so-called “Lord’s Day” (Rev 1:10), mentioned by Yohanan, is mysteriously and somehow Sunday. This is virtually too stupid to even be discussed by students of the Word since there is absolutely nothing in the Book to allow or suggest such a connection. The allusion only arises because some Christians “say” it’s so and not because it is so.

Actually, the Tanakh abundantly describes a coming “Day of YHWH” which refers to the coming period of time when The ELOHIM intervenes in world affairs to terminate Satan’s rule of this planet and man’s irresponsible propensity for sin (Isa 2:12). Yohanan’s reference in Revelation 1:10 connects to this coming day of YHWH (the “Lord’s Day” in the KJV, where YHWH surfaces as “Lord”).

Perhaps the most ridiculous position of sun worship Christianity is the theory that Christians are free to keep Sunday as their rest and religious day on the premise that “any” one day in seven meets YHWH’s law, as outlined above.

For this Christian theory, Christians typically try to misread, misquote and twist the Scriptures and claim that the law only requires the setting aside of any day, as if man or the Christian Church has the authority to decide which day it wants to set apart for worship. No, not so! This is blatant nonsense and stupidity. The law doesn’t specify one day in seven. It expressly specifies the seventh day (Ex 20:10).

More From Colin Deal

The above cited Colin Deal has an incredibly wrong slant on the weekly Sabbath because he incorrectly confuses the weekly Sabbath with the annual Sabbaths (like the first day of Unleavened Bread, Shavuot, Yom Kippur, etc, which were discussed in a previous chapter on the Sign of YESHUA, and as will be further described in subsequent remarks herein).

Since Deal is unable to tell the difference between the two types of Sabbaths in the Word, he actually comes to a position that the Book prescribes neither the seventh day or the first day for rest and worship (Oct 2002 “End Time News”). Deal does this with the following words:

“Although many sincere Christians keep Saturday as the day of worship what some fail to recognize is that ancient Israel’s ‘seventh-day Sabbath’ did not always occur on Saturday. They were changing Sabbaths, being observed on two different days each year because of an additional Sabbath being observed at Pentecost.

“If we suppose, for instance, that the 15th of Abib (when Yisrael left Egypt, see Lev. 23:5-6--ed) which was on the Sabbath, was Saturday, then the seventh day Sabbath would fall on Saturday for seven weeks or until forty nine days had run their course. The fiftieth day, which would be Sunday, would be Pentecost (Lev. 23:15-16). The next seventh-day Sabbath after Pentecost would fall on Sunday.

“Thus it would be until Pentecost of the following year which would change the seventh day Sabbath again. This time it would fall on Monday until the next Pentecost which would be fifty days after the first fifteen days of Abib, as stated, or on the sixty-fifth day of that particular New Year. Thus, Israel’s Sabbath did not always fall on a Saturday throughout the year.”

It is almost useless to even discuss this incredible reasoning of Deal. He simply does not understand that the first day of Unleavened Bread (Aviv 15) and Shavout are annual Sabbaths which generally can fall on any day of the week. He never understands the mitzwah in Exodus 20:8-10 which demands six days of work and then a Sabbath day of rest. With Deal’s thinking, some weeks would have eight days.

This totally false idea of a week which varies in the number of days will be addressed in some detail in subsequent chapters herein (which assess the calendar). Suffice to say, a variable week is totally unscriptural. Deal is thoroughly confused and he has transmitted that confusion to his readers. For sure, there are no such things as variable weeks or floating weekly Sabbath days which change each year.

The Jewish Sabbath or YHWH’s Sabbath?

One of the popular Christian arguments against the Sabbath is that it is the Jewish Sabbath and is not binding upon other peoples. Actually, this stupid argument is used for all of the demands of the Torah which Christians passionately hate and oppose. This Christian reasoning and hate goes back to the days when the Greeks ruled the civilized world (before the Romans took over in the first century BCE).

The famous Christian apologist and spokesman Justin Martyr carried this Christian hate one step further in his confrontation with Trypho the Jew in the mid second century CE.

Justin said: “As I stated before, it was by reason of your sins and the sins of your Fathers that, among other precepts, God imposed upon you the observance of the Sabbath as a mark” (Jul-Aug 2000 “Petah Tikvah,” by Sid Roth, p. 15, quoting the “Ante-Nicene Fathers”). Justin added that this mark (of the Sabbath) was to single the Jews out for the punishment that they so well deserved for their infidelities.

This Christian hatred and opposition to The CREATOR’s Sabbath have been around for most of the last 2,000 years. It is the story of Christianity, despite even the NT admission that the Sabbath was created (by The CREATOR) for Adam (Mk 2:27).

Anyone believing this heresy (of the Sabbath being the Jews’ Sabbath) should not be reading this study at hand. This traditional Christian hatred is too stupid to be believed by Scripturally informed people. Yet, it was anciently believed and is still in the hearts and minds of multiplied millions or billions of people today.

Christian Hatred for Judaism, Revisited

Previous chapters have discussed the supposed Christian hatred for the Jews (especially in groups like the Christian Identity movement, the Ku Klux Klan, the Nazis, etc). The truth is that almost all of these Jew hating groups are strongly Christian in theology and temperament. In this context, they don’t really hate Jews, per se. What they hate is the Jewish religion--Judaism.

Yes, generic Christians passionately hate Judaism and the mitzwot of YHWH--at least, those which do not conform to the theories of Christian humanism in the vein of commandments demonstrating the supposed love of other humans/humanoids (mentioned in a prior chapter on love and the Torah and to be detailed in later chapters).

This hatred is so strong, passionate, powerful and pervasive that it must be demonic in origin. As will be subsequently proven conclusively, this Christian hatred for Judaism has its basis in ancient Grecian sun worship, as noted above and as cited in previous chapters (where the old Greek sun worshippers passionately hated Judaism--but not Jews, per se).

In the perpetuation of this hatred and animosity toward Judaism, the focus has always been upon those mitzwot in the Torah which primarily serve to demonstrate love of The CREATOR YHWH and His various manifestations (like as YESHUA The MESSIAH). In effect, what is hated is not the Jews, but the Sabbath (and the Jewish religion for advocating it).

This is a hard pill for most people to understand and grasp. But evil sun worshippers have always hated YHWH’s Sabbath mitzwah--in ancient days, as well as today. Manifestly, ancient Greeks and modern Christians have both hated the Sabbaths.

Effectively, the former Greek sun worshippers and modern Christians have hated anything and everything which will serve to reflect love of The MOST HIGH instead of love of humans/humanoids. Thus, keeping of the weekly Sabbath and the Scriptural calendar and festivals are hated violently by all sun worshippers (both past Greeks and modern Christians) because those mitzwot show love of The ELOHIM.

Why Sunday Worship?

Since Sunday worship is totally foreign in terms of the Scriptures and since the fourth commandment in the Decalogue is so plain and clear, one has to wonder how in the world anyone professing a belief in YHWH YESHUA and the Scriptures could ever be motivated, persuaded or impressed to worship on Sunday.

Well, the answer is quite simple. In 321 CE, the sun worshipper Constantine decreed that thereafter all persons in the Roman Empire were under obligation to sanctify and set Sunday apart as a rest and worship day (under threat of death). Of course, all complied and became Sunday keepers, if they were not already keeping Sunday. The actual reference will be discussed in a future chapter herein.

Now, while the sun worshipper Constantine imposed Sunday worship on the collective Roman Empire by dictatorial fiat, it must be observed that the collective Christian Church was already keeping and sanctifying Sunday worship and had been doing so for 279 years before Constantine came along with his imperial edict. The full story of this condition will be elaborated upon in a future chapter.

Thereafter, in 364 CE (or possibly in 336 CE, per some reports), the Universal Catholic Church held her Church Council of Laodicea which passed an edict prohibiting rest on the Seventh day Sabbath, under penalty of death. The few Seventh day Sabbathkeepers in the then Roman Empire had to go in hiding, for fear of their lives.

In the late fourth century, the decree of the emperors Gratianus, Valentinianus and Theodosius said-- “On the day of the sun, properly called the Lord’s day by our ancestors, let there be a cessation of law suits, business, and indictments; let no one exact a debt due either the state or an individual; let there be no cognizance of disputes, not even by arbitrators, whether appointed by the courts or voluntarily chosen” (Code of Theodosius, Book 8, Title 8, Law 3).

To show how serious those early Catholic Christians were, this same law from the Code of Theodosius went on to declare that anyone violating that law would not only be adjudged notorious, “but also impious who shall turn aside from an institute and rite of holy religion.” Obviously, this would pave the way for them to be executed at the hands of the state.

Eusebius

In a commentary on the Psalms, the famous Christian historian and Catholic Church leader Eusebius wrote that “All things whatsoever it was our duty to do on the Sabbath, these we have transferred to the Lord’s day, as more appropriately belonging to it, because it has precedence and first in rank, and more honorable than the Jewish Sabbath.”

Eusebius’ words bring to mind Yeshayahu’s famous prophecy, outlined in previous comments in this chapter, on the change of the Sabbath from the Seventh day to the first day of the week (Isa 56:2, 12). Like Yeshayahu predicted, men would think to change the solemnity of the Seventh day to the next day (the first day of the week).

Stupid Protestants, who know little or nothing from YHWH’s Word, suppose that Sunday worship is something to be found in the Scriptures. In fact, there is absolutely nothing in the Book about it. Its entire authority comes from Rome!

Over the years, the Roman Catholic Church has consistently admitted that Sunday has been sanctified and established as a holy day by her own edicts. Even today, informed Catholics will quickly attest to this historic reality.

Catholics Are Far More Informed

Yes, Catholic Christians are far more informed. Many know and understand that the Catholic Church has set the first day of the week aside and sanctified it. Many of them brag and boast of the role that the Catholic Church has played in the change and how Protestant Christians are ignorant and maybe even stupid for accepting the change.

A Catholic theologian named Henry Tuberville, wrote in 1833, in an article on “An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine,” that the Sabbath was changed by the governors of the Christian Church (the Catholic Church). He said that the Church’s change of the Sabbath was proof that she had authority to command feasts and holy days.

In answer to the question of “How prove you that the church hath power to command feasts and holy days?,” Tuberville noted “By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church.”

Tuberville went on by charging that “by keeping Sunday, they (the Protestants) acknowledge the church’s power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin; and by not keeping the rest (of the feasts) by her commanded, they again deny, in fact, the same power.”

In an 1868 article on the “Plain Truth About the Protestantism of Today,” Catholic theologian Louis Gaston de Segur wrote: “It was the Catholic Church which, by the authority of JESUS CHRIST, has transferred this (Sabbath) rest to Sunday in remembrance of the resurrection of the Lord. Thus, the observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the (Catholic) Church.”

Catholic Stephen Keenan wrote in the 1876 edition of “A Doctrinal Catechism” that the Catholic Church has power to institute festivals of precept and had she not this power, she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for Saturday, the seventh day, “a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.”

The January 1883 issue of “The American Catholic Quarterly Review” had an article by John Gilmary Shae on “The Observance of Sunday and Civil Laws for Its Enforcement,” which said “Protestantism, in discarding the authority of the (Catholic) Church, has no good reason for its Sunday theory, and ought, logically, to keep Saturday as the Sabbath.”

More Catholic Words

Catholic Priest T. Enright of Redemptorist College of Kansas City, MO for years had a $1,000 offer to Protestants. In a 1884 lecture at Hartford, KS, he noted “I have repeatedly offered $1,000 to anyone who can prove to me from the Bible alone that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no such law in the Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone.”

Writing in the 1892 book on “The Papal Controversy,” D. B. Ray noted that “From this same Catholic Church you have accepted your Sunday, and that Sunday, as the Lord’s day, she has handed down as a tradition; and the entire Protestant world has accepted it as tradition, for you have not one iota of Scripture to establish it.”

An editorial in the Sep 23, 1893, “Catholic Mirror” of Baltimore, MD reported “The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue of their Divine mission, changed the day (of worship) from Saturday to Sunday... The Christian Sabbath is therefore to this day the acknowledged offspring of the Catholic Church, as Spouse of the Holy Ghost, without a word of remonstrance from the Protestant world.”

In the “Catholic Mirror” of Dec 23, 1893, James Cardinal Gibbons wrote: “Reason and sense demand the acceptance for one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.”

Albert Smith, Chancellor of the Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore, wrote in a Feb 10, 1920, letter that “If Protestants would follow the Bible, they should worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church.”

The Aug 14, 1942, “Question Box” in the “Catholic Universe Bulletin” suggested that the Catholic Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by the right of the divine, infallible authority given her and that the “Protestants, claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday.”

An article on “To Tell You the Truth,” in the Oct 3, 1947, issue of “The Catholic Virginian,” asserted that “Today most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the (Catholic) Church outside the Bible.”

Still More Catholic Words

Priest Peter R. Kraemer of the Catholic Extension Society of Chicago wrote that Protestants, who accept the Bible as their rule of faith and religion, should go back to the Sabbath and the fact that they do not, “stultifies them in the eyes of every thinking man.”

Going on, Kraemer said that Catholics do not accept the Bible as the only rule of faith because they have the authority of the Church as a rule to guide them. He argues that it is laughable to see the Protestant Churches demand the observance of Sunday of which there is nothing in their Bible.

In the 1965 edition of “The Faith Explained,” Catholic Leo J. Trese asserts that there is nothing in the “Bible about the change of the Lord’s day from Saturday to Sunday. It comes from the tradition of the (Catholic) Church.”

Trese goes on to say “That is why we find so illogical the attitude of many non-Catholics, who say that they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the Bible and yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord’s day on the say-so of the Catholic Church.”

The many quotations outlined above from numerous Catholic writers and authorities have been taken largely from a tract from the Bible Sabbath Association, quoting those sources. Interestingly, there were many, many more. But space would not allow their presentation.

Christian Sunday Worship is Very Ancient

Actually, Christianity has been keeping Sunday as her holy day--probably from her beginnings, around 42 CE or so. Even recently, the modern Pope John Paul II has issued a Pastoral Letter to all Roman Catholics declaring that Sunday is the true Sabbath of “God” and that many world problems are due to the neglect of the Sabbath commandment (May 1999 “Prophecy Flash,” p. 69).

So, where did Christianity get Sunday worship and why? This too is easy. She got it from the old sun worship cults--all of which worshipped on Sunday. Sunday has always been the primary holy day of sun worshippers.

In his book on “Fossilized Customs” (p. 7), Lew White says that the ancient ritual among sun worshippers was to gather at dawn on Sunday mornings to watch and greet the rising sun. Surely, this has been the basis of Easter sunrise services, to be discussed in a subsequent chapter.

Writing in “The Outline of History,” H. G. Wells wrote that “It would seem the Christians adopted Sun-day as their chief day of worship instead of the Jewish Sabbath from the Mithraic cult.” Of course, the Mithra cult, as well as all other ancient sun worshippers, worshipped the sun on Sunday. Historians, apparently without exception, have recognized this reality.

Gerald L. Berry adds: “Since Mithra was the sun god, Sunday was automatically sacred to him--the ‘Lord’s Day’ --long before Christ” (“Religions of the World,” p. 56).

However, the writer of this study at hand would note that the great presence of Chrishnaism in the first century CE Roman Empire would suggest that Sunday worship might also could have come from Chrishnaism. Perhaps the Christians got Sunday from both the Mithra and Chrishna cults.

And while the linkage may not be positively established, there is reason to believe that the earlier mentioned Yarovam may get some credit for imposing Sunday sun worship on the Northern ten tribes of Yisrael when he took over that kingdom and broke it away from Rechavam and Jerusalem.

Yarovam was evidently a sun worshipper who picked up that faith from his Egyptian wife or from his stay in Egypt (II Chron 10:2).

For certain, he did change the fall feast (Sukkot) to the 15th day of the eight month, instead of YHWH’s ordained seventh month (I Kg 12:32-33), as mentioned earlier, and perhaps changed the solemnity of the Seventh day Sabbath to the next day, as some persons suggest (including Herbert W. Armstrong of the Worldwide Church of God).

Hence Israelites, who later became Christians, may have already had a dose of Sunday sun worship. Apparently, it is correct to say that Christian Israelites have been sun worshippers ever since the days of Yarovam, almost 3,000 years ago.

The Present Weekly Cycle

Before proceeding on to new topics, a few words must be shared on the question of the validity of the present weekly cycle. In other words, is the present Seventh day of the week the same day as the Seventh day commanded in Exodus 20?

Some Christians, wanting to argue and find an excuse to keep Sunday, say that the calendar has been changed over the years. While some ancient areas of Europe did experiment for a while with an eight day week, the seven day week always prevailed and nullified all efforts historically to alter it.

The next chapter will address this question in some detail. Hence, there is no need to elaborate upon it at this time. Suffice to say, the present Roman calendar came from Egypt in 46 BCE and the few changes in it never interfered in the weekly cycle (just as the leap year change, every fourth year, does not alter the weekly cycle).

Assuredly, the weekly cycle, as established in the Roman Empire in 46 BCE, has never changed. From 46 BCE to present times, the Jews have diligently kept the Seventh day of the week as the Scriptural Sabbath. Manifestly, the Jews would never have allowed any alteration of their worship days and cycles (as will be proven in the succeeding chapters).

YESHUA, Shaul the apostle and the other Apostolic people verified the Seventh day Sabbath (as kept by the Jews) and its cycle in their routine worship activities--mentioned previously herein. Collectively, they always worshipped with the generic Jews on the Sabbath day. There is never an indication otherwise.

The Bottom Line

The present Christian Church started keeping Sunday around or evidently by 42 CE. Christians have been just as adamant about keeping Sunday. They have not and would not have allowed any alteration of that day and cycle in their worship.

The validity of the present Seventh days (as kept by Jews) and present Sundays (as kept by Christians) will be discussed and proven in the following chapters. There is no justification for anyone to argue against Christianity and Judaism on this thing. The point is that history and both the Jewish and Christian religions and peoples declare that the present weekly cycle has not been altered in the last 2,000 years.

Chapter 218--Sun Worship and the Calendar

The Julian-Gregory Calendar

Our present Western calendar is called the Julian-Gregory calendar. The Roman Empire (the basis of the Western culture) adopted this calendar when the emperor Julius Caesar obtained it from Egyptian sun worshippers in 46 BCE. Since it is a solar calendar, ordained by sun worshipping Egyptians, it correctly can be called a sun worship calendar.

Rome had historically been using a lunar calendar at that time. But using his power and authority, Caesar imposed the (sun worship) solar calendar on the empire (per “The Clock We Live On,” by Isaac Asimov, “Encyclopedia Britannica” and “Encyclopedia Americana”).

The point of this calendar (with its cycles of days, months, years and choice of names) is that it is a solar, sun worship calendar adopted from Egyptian sun worshippers. Conversely, there is a Scriptural calendar which is a luni-solar calendar with very different cycles, periods, days, months, years and names.

Despite a few modifications over the years (i.e., a name change, a leap year alteration, taking a day away from one month to add to another month on three occasions and principally the change by Pope Gregory, to be shortly discussed), the weekly cycle was never altered or changed in the European sun worship culture (though there were some ancient attempts to use a eight day week in a few areas, as noted earlier).

The few historic changes to the Julian calendar were of the same order as the present leap year alteration (as pointed out in the prior chapter). Approximately every four years, a day is added to February. But this added day never disrupts the weekly cycle. Thus, the established weekly cycle continues unaffected.

In other words, the seven day weekly cycle, established by Julius Caesar in 46 BCE, has never changed. Thus, it has never been disrupted or altered in any manner. This is a most important point. The weekly cycle operates independently of the months and solar year features of the calendar and the addition or dropping of a day does not alter the weekly cycle.

So, when Gais Octavius Augustus (emperor from 44 BCE to 14 CE) dropped one day from February to add to August 2,000 years ago, the weekly cycle was unaffected. His other few minor changes were of the same nature.

And strangely enough (but of great benefit to people attempting to obey YHWH), the weekly cycle in the current sun worship calendar is fairly close to Scriptural truth (one problem arises in the international date line, as will be described in comments to follow). However, there are now enormous efforts worldwide to change the present Julian-Gregory calendar (primarily, in some fashion to disrupt the weekly cycle).

Some Holdouts to Rome

While most of the Roman Empire fell into line on this calendar in 46 BCE and its few minor modifications in later years, there was some holdouts in immediately adopting this calendar and/or some of its few changes over the years, even though the Caesars and the later popes were very powerful in the old Roman Empire.

For example, by this calendar, the new year starts just after Christmas and the winter solstice at the “birth of the sun.” Besides being totally ridiculous, in terms of logic, this new year in the dead of winter is totally unscriptural.

As will be proven in a later chapter, the Scriptures prescribe a new year starting at the new moon (Aviv 1) nearest the spring day equal night (equinox), which occurs around March 19th to 22nd in the Northern Hemisphere in the sun worship calendar (religious Jews call this Aviv 1 “Yom Kippur Katan,” a small Yom Kippur).

Despite a change of New Year’s to January 1st by Rome, the peoples in Great Britain (and later colonial America) continued to start their new year in the spring on March 25th. In terms of the Egyptian-Julian solar calendar, this date of March 25th is interestingly very close to what would have been calculated for creation week, if that week and the Julian solar calendar were linked together.

The question of the creation week will be addressed in a later chapter herein. Suffice to say, here, there is much support for the first day of that first year to have been calculable on or near March 25th, per the Julian solar calendar. This date is not far-fetched at all in general terms (if one insists on using a strictly solar date without the benefit of the new moon).

The point of this truth is that there is every reason to believe that the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic tradition for this date goes back a long way to the history of those people in ancient Canaan land (as discussed in a previous chapter). It is highly plausible that these people held onto that concept when the Romans imposed the Egyptian-Julian calendar on them.

The Ten-Day Correction

Otherwise, the English/British peoples also refused for ages to recognize a needed correction of the Julian solar calendar, as decreed by Pope Gregory in 1582, despite otherwise using the basic Julian sun worship calendar.

These Gregory stipulated changes came about because under the Julian calendar every fourth year was a leap year automatically with an added day. By following this practice, the calendar “added” an approximate extra one day every hundred years.

By the just mentioned reign of Pope Gregory in the 16th century, some ten days too much had been added to the solar calendar (throwing the calendar off ten days, per the solar cycle) over the centuries, from the time of Julius Caesar--which threw it out of alignment with the spring equinox by ten days (“The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia,” p. 127).

To correct this ten days deficiency, Gregory ordered a drop of ten days in 1582 (which did not alter or affect the weekly cycle) and a provision that in future years, a leap year would be added every fourth year, except it would not be added every 100 years unless that year was divisible by 400. In other words, in the first three 100 year periods, only 24 leap years would be recognized and not 25.

But in the fourth 100-year period, 25 leap years would be observed. Otherwise, the calendar would remain as it had been observed and used for centuries. Generally, the civilized world came to accept this change (though some Eastern Orthodox areas did hold onto the old Julian calendar without the Gregory modification--which has caused some confusion between them and Rome over observing the pagan Easter).

Eventually, in 1752, Britain (and her American colonies) adopted the changes decreed by Pope Gregory and also changed the New Year from March 25th to January 1st. But the spring reckoning persisted somewhat because even US presidents were inaugurated around March 4th in America, until Roosevelt came along in the 1930s and changed it to January.

As was true in Augustus’ days, when he initiated some five minor calendar alterations, none of the Gregory, British or Roosevelt changes affected the weekly cycle. The seven day weekly cycle established by Caesar in 46 BCE is still the same one so-called humanity observes today (as asserted in the preceding chapter).

There is some fantastic proof of this reality and proof that this present seven day weekly cycle is the precise same one which was established with Adam at creation.

While there might have been some confusion over exactly when the seven day week started and ended (when Yisrael first came out of Egypt), The HIGHEST worked a miracle for forty years to dramatically affirm the cycle and teach it to the Israelites. YHWH fed the Israelites manna for forty years.

Per His Word, they gathered the manna for six days. On the sixth day, they gathered a double portion. On the seventh day, they rested and did not gather food (Ex 16:4-6, 15-26). Please note that this weekly cycle and Sabbath day observance was established some time before the Ten Commandments were even given on Sinai.

It is also true that the Israelites in Canaan land (both in the House of Yehudah and the House of Yisrael) transgressed and violated YHWH’s Sabbath days of rest and were both accordingly thrust into slavery and captivity, as Yechezkel asserted (per the outline in the prior chapter). But for all of those years, they had the prophets up to and including Yirmeyahu and Yechezkel.

The prophets understood the correct Scriptural weekly cycle and which day was the Sabbath day. Be assured that this reality was constantly brought to the people’s attention. The Israelites may have chosen to disobey YHWH’s law (Ex 20:8-11), but they knew the truth or they would not have been held accountable for Sabbath breaking.

The Jews Learned

During the Babylonian exile, the Jews finally realized the importance of the weekly cycle and observance of the Seventh day Sabbath. However good or bad the Jews have been, the one thing that they have done diligently for 2,500 years, since the conquest of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, is that they have kept and observed the correct weekly cycle with the proper Seventh day Sabbath.

On returning to Canaan land from the exile, the Jews had Ezra, Nechemyah, Haggai, Zekharyah, Malakhi and other leaders to all guide and direct them in observance of the correct weekly cycle and Seventh day Sabbath. It is a certainty that these leaders would have correctly known the Scriptural Sabbath and would have imposed it on the people (as happened in Nehemiah 13:15-22).

The Jews were so diligent and careful about observing the correct Seventh day Sabbath that at one time a group of some 1,000 of them were attacked by a Greek army on the Sabbath and they refused to come out and fight that day. They were all murdered--men, women and children (I Maccabees 2:32-38). After this incident, the Jews have been willing to defend themselves--even on the Sabbath.

In New Testament days, the Jews observed this same weekly cycle and Sabbath. They had a certain ritual and procedure to follow at the synagogues for the worship on the Sabbath. The leaders and people of the first century Apostolic Assembly all kept this same weekly cycle and Sabbath with the Jews. There is never any mention or suggestion that anything was wrong with the Sabbath day, as designated by the Jews.

Confirmed by YESHUA and the Apostles

At least, on one or more times, YESHUA’s Own comments confirmed the correctness of the weekly Sabbath, as determined by the Jews (Lu 13:16). The Scriptures note that, per their custom, YESHUA and Shaul both went into the synagogues for worship on the Sabbath days, as designated and followed by the Jews (Lu 4:16; Acts 17:2).

There is never one iota of evidence to suggest that any person in the NT had any problem, question or concern over the correctness and validity of the Seventh day Sabbaths, as specified by the Jews (as established in the former chapter).

It is manifestly certain that YESHUA or Shaul would have never went to the synagogues for worship on a wrong day and particularly if the Jews had lost the true cycle. They were not hypocrites and certainly abided by truth in their personal worship practices (Jo 4:24).

The NT Sabbath Issues

Further dramatic proof of this conclusion is clear from the several conflicts YESHUA had with the Pharisees (evidently of the School of Shammai) over the Sabbath--such as plucking grain and healing on the Sabbaths, as mentioned in a former chapter. Please note that these conflicts were not over keeping the Sabbath; but rather, they surfaced on how to keep the Sabbath.

As discussed earlier, the Talmud developed a number of man-made restrictions on how to keep the Sabbath and not on whether to keep the Sabbath. The Shammai Pharisees were responsible for some of these. But some were evidently older traditions of men. Clearly, YESHUA disobeyed many of these man-made restrictions which impeded upon the Sabbath (as ordained by The ELOHIM).

If the Jews had lost the weekly cycle and were worshipping on the wrong Seventh day Sabbath, YESHUA would have certainly known about it. One can be absolutely sure that He would have pointed this problem out to them whenever they accused Him of Sabbath violations.

Yet, He always agreed with them over which day was the Sabbath (either in His Own words [like at Lu 13:16] or in His actions of assent)--while disagreeing with them over their Talmudic rules. Since YESHUA and the Apostolic Assembly kept and observed the same Sabbath (and weekly cycle) as the Jews, it is a certainty that the weekly Sabbaths that they were keeping were right and correct.

Sun Worshippers as Well

Another group of early religious adherents who observed a seven day weekly cycle was the Mithra sun worshippers in Rome and assuredly most sun worshippers around the world (certainly, long before 46 BCE and the adoption of the Julian calendar by Rome). Indeed, the evidence is most persuasive that all sun worshippers worshipped the sun on Sunday--the first day of the week, as discussed elsewhere herein.

Sunday sun worshippers certainly knew which day was Sunday. They obviously had been observing a weekly cycle of seven days for some time (although some minor parts of Europe reportedly tried an eight-day week in ancient times--before settling in on the seven-day week). It’s hard to fathom that the Mithra sun worshippers became confused over which day was Sunday.

The Christian faith came into being manifestly before the fall of Jerusalem to Rome in 70 CE (evidently in 42 CE), probably through the efforts of Simon Magus and Apollonius, elsewhere commented upon in this study.

Since Christians have attached so much importance to their Sunday worship for 2,000 years, it’s ludicrous and out of the question to speculate that they would have dared to allow any alteration of the weekly cycle which would have interfered in their Sunday worship in the old Roman Empire (certainly in modern Europe).

As mentioned in the prior chapter, we can all rest assured that the world ruling and dominant Christian Church has not stupidly and incompetently allowed any alternations in the prevailing weekly-cycle to affect their historic and present Sunday worship holidays.

The point of this presentation is that during the years following Caesar’s establishment of the seven day weekly cycle, a number of religious faiths have kept and observed that cycle for the next 2,000 years because of their worship on certain days. Both the Christians and the Jews are quite adamant that no disruptions of the weekly cycle have occurred since Rome adopted the Egyptian sun worship calendar in 46 BCE.

International Date Line

Besides starting a day at midnight (which had commercial appeal and acceptance for profit and gain), instead of sunset, as is Scriptural, one of the main other problems respecting the weekly cycle in the modern sun worship calendar and culture concerns the establishment of the international dateline for the beginning of a day and the resulting week (as briefly touched upon in the above comments).

This imaginary (zig zagging) line was established in the middle of the Pacific Ocean in 1884 by the leading nations in the world (per “Biblical Astronomy and The Calendar,” by Harold Hemenway). Apparently, commercial, trade, monetary and economic considerations were the motivations for the line chosen without any obvious concern over what the Word might say.

Of course, there is an apparent need for such a line or place on the circular globe to start the days and the weeks (and even the months and years) in order to facilitate man’s governmental, commercial and social activities across the planet. The problem is not so much about designating such a line; but rather, the dilemma surfaces because of man’s choice of a location for that line.

For the student of truth, it seems clear where the “new” day and “new” week started. Read Genesis 1 and 2. Adam and the created order around him evidently started in the Euphrates River Valley of modern Iraq--perhaps even South in the Persian Gulf, although there is a Jewish tradition that the Garden of Eden site was at Jerusalem.

This Jerusalem option is not far fetched at all. It is very possible that the Garden of Eden was a huge area. It may have resembled the later land grant to Avraham (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates. In that case, it could have included both Jerusalem and the Euphrates Valley. In terms of the territory involved, the day would have still started at the Euphrates.

In any case, the first seven days of the first week and the first day of the second week dawned upon or commenced (at sunset) with the creation (and particularly with Adam on the 6th day) in that precise locale (which likely was the Euphrates Valley or perhaps Jerusalem--if the Garden of Eden was limited to that area).

Why would persons attempting to obey The MOST HIGH want to substitute a man-made imaginary line to start the new day and new week in some other place other than what the Word clearly teaches? While such a line in the Pacific Ocean might sound good for man’s commercial reasons, the fact remains that it is unscriptural.

A Modern Response

The above discussion on the international date line prompted a response from a reader of this production (when it was still in draft). The respondent was a Sabbathkeeper, probably fairly close in theology to the Seventh day Adventists.

This reader recognized the plain reality that the date line should be in the Middle East, per the Scriptural record. However, this respondent went on to inject some human thinking and rational into the discussion. The reader thoughtfully added--that the paradox is that it probably works best, away out in the blue Pacific where it doesn’t split any large land areas and populations.

Of course, the world authorities who established the international date line in the middle of the Pacific used this precise rational. Seemingly, none of them ever really gave any consideration whatsoever to the Scriptures and precisely what the Word does say or what The CREATOR may have intended.

Actually, as already outlined by the writer of this study, in the above comments on the date line, the real motivation for the line chosen was undoubtedly profits and economic factors (from trade and commercialism) which would be less affected by a line out in the middle of the Pacific, as opposed to a line which ran through a land mass with a population or populations of people to contend with.

But the reader’s letter, just noted, brings to the surface the interplay of human reasoning and contemplation on a subject like this. Even when man has been exposed to truth from the Scriptures, he can still rationalize and justify his actions of rebellion against truth as being a proper and legitimate action--based upon human reasoning.

Man always seems to have the capability and capacity to rationalize, justify and support his acts of sin and rebellion on the basis of human reasoning. Actually, human pride and especially the pride of life (confidence and trust in this human governed system of things) always comes into play to affect man’s thinking.

The bottom line here is that what works best is the obedience of the Word. Disobedience never works best, contrary to human reasoning. The date line could be placed in Iraq (where it seems to belong) and it would work out totally satisfactorily--just as there are time zones all over the world which essentially work out all right (because world commercialism and profits were never YAH’s plan and way).

Some Observe the Wrong Day for Sabbath

Because of man’s stupidity and rebellion toward YHWH’s Word, this line in the Pacific makes the culture, society and peoples living between that line and where it should be (evidently just to the East of the Euphrates River to the mid Pacific) function, live and conduct their lives generally on the wrong days of the week.

Now, this may not seem to be a big deal for some of the days of the week. But it is profoundly important to persons attempting to obey The HIGHEST in terms of the Sabbath. Most Sabbath keepers take to heart the seriousness of the fourth commandment of the Decalogue and try to do their level best to keep it correctly.

Consequently, the Sabbath that now starts at the present international dateline is, in fact, wrong since that day correctly should be involving the 6th day of the week (providing it starts correctly at sunset) at the international dateline in the Pacific Ocean.

Actually, the true Sabbath will not commence until the (sixth day of the week) sun sets in the Euphrates Valley. All this means, of course, is that people (certainly including Israelites) using the sun worship calendar in Australia and the Far East typically recognize the Sabbath as being on the sixth day of the week.

Another Ridiculous Action of Man

Incidentally, the stupidity of this international date line in the middle of the Pacific is about as gross as have been Christian attempts to date the birth of their Gee-Zeus in 1 CE--as seems to been done for centuries. Previous comments and a later chapter herein describe and establish the reality that The Scriptural YESHUA was actually born about 5 BCE.

Today, many Christian scholars admit the dating mistake. But they are in no mood to take any action to set the record straight. Baptist leader Jerry Falwell typifies the compromise and confusion of Christian leaders. Falwell’s newspaper, the “National Liberty Journal,” had a remark on its masthead in December 1999 which said “Celebrating the 1999th Birthday of Jesus Christ” (evidently on Christmas).

Falwell probably doesn’t know the truth. Like Christians at large, it is evident that Falwell still believes in the Christian Christmas story, as occurring around December 25 in I BCE or so (although the Catholic monk Dionysius Exiguus calculated the birth of the Christian Gee-Zeus in 1 AD--Jan-Feb 2001 “End Time News,” p. 2).

Chapter 219--The Day

Gene Heck

In a very evident act of ridiculous calendar manipulations, a man named Gene Heck has theorized that a day runs from noon to noon, instead of sunset to sunset (which is defined as evening in the Hebrew term ehrev), as the Book so states (Gen 1:5, Ex 22:26; 30:8, Lev 22:7; 23:32, Deut 24:15; Josh 8:29; 10:26; Jud 14:18; II Sam 3:35; Neh 13:19; Ps 104:19; Prov 7:9; Dan 6:14; Mk 1:32; Lu 4:40; Eph 4:26).

A classic proof of sunset is outlined in Deuteronomy 23:11 where the unclean man must go outside the camp of Yisrael and wash himself as “evening (ehrev) cometh on.” My KJV text has a footnote for “cometh,” indicating that in the Hebrew it means “turneth toward.” In context, the man can come back into the camp of Yisrael when the sun is down (sunset).

Sunset is also conclusively proven by the Hebrew “bo,” meaning to come-arrive at, come up to, come to pass, march out or in, to bring to, to go in, enter into (meaning closure, as the arrival and/or precise moment of sunset)--per Botterweck & Ringgren (v. II, p. 20-49); Brown, Driver & Briggs (p.97-99); Young’s (p. 424); Gesenius (p. 106), Halliaday, (p. 34), Davidson (p. 70) and other Hebrew lexicons--at Deut 16:6; Josh 10:13, 27; II Chron 18:34; etc (which the KJV translates as “going down” of the sun).

This man Heck refuses to accept the meaning of the Hebrew “boqer,” meaning daybreak (which he claims is midnight) and the above cited Hebrew “ehrev,” meaning sunset (which he attaches to high noon).

He has even went to the extreme of preparing a publication of 60 pages or so to support his ridiculous thinking. Tragically, for truth’s sake, a number of Scripturally shallow people have actually become his followers (Heckites) to join in to help promote his stupid theory (like Christian Identity leader Pete Peters).

Heck utterly ignores the Hebrew “tsohar” (meaning noon or midday), which differentiates from ehrev and boqer in Psalms 55:17 (where David said he prayed three times a day--evening, morning and noon). Here, David noted these three distinctively different points of time identifications and even laid them out in their proper sequence, as they occur during a 24 hour civil day.

In his book (“The Weekly Sabbath When?,” p. 21-23, 57-59), Heck abundantly criticizes the Talmud, but then goes on to hypocritically use a quote from the Talmud with a bad interpretation and incorrect conclusion (ibid, p. 16)--along with human traditions from sun/star worshippers and various English dictionaries to try to prove his stupid thesis (too bad for Gene, but the Scriptures weren’t written in English).

Heck then goes on to develop charts which have no Scriptural basis whatsoever (ibid, p. 7-19). They may look good to ignorant people, but they have no bearing on truth.

He refuses to accept the recognizable and observable signs of sunset and sunrise (as required and stipulated in Gen 1:14) for evening and morning and instead chooses the uncertain points of noon and midnight, which can only be known precisely with a clock or other man-made time device (ibid, p. 24). He says that noon and midnight never change (ibid, p. 24).

True, they never change by man-made clocks (theoretically only, since all man-made clocks develop errors over time and necessitate corrections). However, high noon and midnight change regularly in the observable heavens (especially in respect to the earth, moon, stars and constellations) and this reality is what counts in respect to the Scriptural calendar.

In the winter months and in the Northern hemisphere on planet earth, the sun (high noon) appears visibly more in the Southern skies while in the summer months, it moves more into the Northern skies. At the equinoxes, it is directly overhead (near the equator).

Problems

For followers of Heck, wishing to use shadows to determine high noon, reality is that the presence and direction of any shadows at high noon are constantly changing because they are utterly dependent upon the time of the year.

Since there is an obvious need to observe the sun and heavenly signs in order to determine the new day and to properly keep the Sabbath, one wonders how a person can observe midnight (without a man-made clock subject to error)? How about high noon?

Clearly, Genesis 1:14 demands the observation of the sun to establish the day and not the observation of a sundial, clock or shadow. People can’t look at the high noon sun without blinding themselves!

Sometimes, Heck says that “evening” means high noon (ibid, p. 20, 25); sometimes 6 PM (ibid, p. 32); sometimes sunset (ibid, p. 30-31); sometimes when the sun is going down from high noon (ibid, p. 25); sometimes when shadows fall (ibid, p. 33); sometimes night or darkness (ibid, p. 29); sometimes a second before midnight (ibid, p. 9); and sometimes the twelve hour period from noon to midnight (ibid, p. 15)--yet saying that it is a never changing sign (ibid, p. 24).

It appears that Mr Heck defines evening by whatever time condition that he may need on any particular Scripture to justify his overall thesis about a noon to noon civil day. He exhibits similar confusion over the meaning of morning when he bounces around with various points in time.

For defining morning, he uses an English dictionary and definition to grant him some leeway or latitude to make it mean anything from midnight to high noon (again, for whatever time factor he may need on a particular Scriptural interpretation).

Importantly, the contextual uses of the Hebrew and Greek words for morning often clarify it as daybreak--like at John 8:2 (using the Greek “orthros”), which proves that midnight is out of the question.

On this line of thinking, Mark 1:35 (as suggested by Heck) proves nothing because the Greek “proi” (translated as morning at Mk 1:35) is not as precise on daybreak, as are the Hebrew “boqer” or the Greek “orthros.”

The Greek “proi” seems to allow some latitude, just as is true with the English word “morning,” although Acts 28:23 (using proi) certainly will never allow for a belief that Shaul preached to his visitors from midnight to noon, as would be true with Heck’s theory.

Since he wishes to believe that he should use English dictionaries to define words he finds in English translations of the Book (without regard to their original Hebrew and Greek meanings), Heck chose to define the English word “even” (as used in the KJV) as meaning “equal” (ibid, p. 16), never understanding that in Old English (in use in 1607), even was the same as evening (Funk & Wagnalls’ “Standard Desk Dictionary,” p. 219).

The 1607 King James translators “sometimes” translated the Hebrew word “ehrev” as even, instead of evening, as they otherwise did. Of course, Heck tried to use the Old English “even” with a modern English meaning of “equal” to conclude that since high noon divides the daylight hours into two equal parts, it must mean the same as “even” in the KJV.

So what? Again, the Hebrew Scriptures were not written in English. Thus, it matters not one whit what “even” meant in 1607 or 396 years later in 2003. As a matter of information, the Hebrew “tsohar” means high noon and most English translators would not dare attempt to translate it as “even” (beyond the confused Mr Heck).

More Problems

Using his ideas, Heck concludes that the Passover day (starting at sunset) actually started some six hours earlier at high noon (“The Weekly Sabbath When?,” p. 32); that the Passover lamb was slain at 12 o’clock noon (ibid, p. 32); that The MESSIAH ate the Passover at 6 PM (ibid, p. 32) in contrast to eating it at night as the law required (Ex 12:8); that YESHUA, as The Passover LAMB, did not die on Passover day, but a day later (ibid, p. 54); and that the Book’s reference to three days and three nights makes no sense at all (Matt 12:38-40).

While his unscriptural theories make some days of the month, like Aviv 14, start six hours “earlier” at noon on the real Aviv 13 (ibid, p. 32), Heck otherwise maintains that some days of the week (like the Seventh day Sabbath) start some 18 hours “later” at the next high noon following sunset (ibid, p. 59). Yet, he complains about Babylonian confusion (ibid, p. 23-24).

Gene Heck tries to make a big deal out of the situation with David and Jonathan when they agreed to meet “at even” on the third day (I Sam 20:5), but Jonathan actually showed up on a morning (I Sam 20:35) where the KJV states “at the time appointed” (ibid, p. 34). Of course, it doesn’t matter what time one attaches to these stated differences of morning and evening, there is some confusion in these texts.

Consequently, if one recognizes the Hebrew ehrev and boqer as meaning sunset and sunrise, I Samuel 20:5-35 presents a problem with the time difference.

However, the same precise time difference surfaces with Heck’s theories of ehrev meaning high noon and boqer meaning midnight or however else he may attempt to translate these words with his ideas on multiple meanings. The “Soncino Books of the Bible” (v. III, p. 128) presents the more authoritative Hebrew assessment of I Samuel 20:35.

It notes that Jonathan was late (for whatever reason) on his meeting with David (per the chronological construction of I Sam 20:5-35). Thus, Jonathan was supposed to be there at sunset on the third day; while he actually arrived some twelve hours later at sunrise on the same third day. The problem in this text is that I Sam 20:35 appears to have a bad translation, as suggested by the Soncino editor, Dr S. Goldman.

This Jewish Rav and Hebrew authority gives the better view as “to the place appointed” and not the time appointed. What happened was that Jonathan was late. But he correctly came to the proper “place” as appointed and there met David, after shooting the arrows. Moreover, the ravens fed Eliyahu at boqer-daybreak and ehrev-sunset at I Kings 17:6 and not at noon and midnight, as Heck would believe.

If Gene Heck would spend just a small portion of time pursuing an understanding of the Hebrew text (in places like I Samuel 20:35, I Kings 17:6 and the other cited problems) in lieu of his attention on English dictionaries and the theories of star worshippers, then he likely would not have confused and misled his several followers who are blindly following him down the primrose lane of sin.

For benefit of people like Heck and all other teachers of the Scriptures (including this writer as well), Yakov wrote that would be teachers will be more critically judged than other people (Jas 3:1, where the KJV mistranslates the Greek “didaskalos”).

The reason being is that when teachers are wrong, it doesn’t necessarily involve their personal sins only. Their wrong teachings can lead any number of other gullible people to also become sinners.

Some Are Taken In By Heck

The only thing that can be said for Heck’s effort is that it appeals to a number of sun worshippers in the Identity movement, who want to have some justification for their Sunday morning sun worship in defiance of the Word. Quite naturally, sun worshippers go out of their way and the extra mile to try to find some reason or basis to rebelliously disobey the fourth commandment in the Decalogue.

Interestingly though, by Heck’s methodology (“The Weekly Sabbath When?,” p. 50-51, 59), the one, single, possible, NT reference to Sunday (Mk 16:9) and Christian ideas for a Sunday morning resurrection end up falling on the second day of the week, per the Greek “epiphosko” (dusk at Matt 28:1 and Lu 23:54), discussed earlier.

So it’s hard to understand why Christian sun worshippers would be taken in by Heck’s stupid theory, as some of them have been taken in.

Actually, this noon to noon reckoning for a day is not an invention of Gene Heck. In truth, the old star worshipping astrologers used a noon to noon reckoning for a civil day (per Isaac Asimov in “The Clock We Live On”)--because they were up at night watching (worshipping) the stars and the noon to noon thinking allowed them to attach one date to the entire night.

The commercial world preferred the midnight to midnight day for obvious profit reasons. Since money is the name of the game, the wishes of the commercial world prevailed in the Christian sun worship society.

Heck argues that the US and other nations kept the noon to noon day until 1925 when it was changed (to midnight); but offers no proof beyond confusing statements from a 1842 newspaper and Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia, coupled with claims that US government offices were open on Saturday mornings to noon and the change in government administrations happened at noon (ibid, p. 36, 42-43).

Of course, none of this has any bearing on the Scriptures.

This writer has read the newspaper reference made by Heck and there seems to be no reason at all to read the interpretation into it which he does. In other words, it doesn’t support a noon to noon day at all.

Obviously, the change of administrations (like the US presidents and governors) happens at noon because this is the most practical time. A change and ceremony would be out of the question at midnight, sunrise or even sunset.

US government offices closed at noon on Saturdays because the traditional sun worship culture used Saturday afternoons as a “preparation” time to get ready for their Saturday nights of partying, playing and fun and Sunday sun worship services.

While Christian sun worship services historically occurred on Sunday mornings, some Catholic sun worshippers went in for midnight services, as noted in a prior chapter. Still other Christians liked Sunday morning sunrise services.

The Passover Problem

One of the several things which led Heck astray was over how the Talmud handled Passover in YESHUA’s day.

Though he clearly misunderstood the words, Heck quoted “Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon” that “The Pharisees...and the Rabbinists considered the time when the sun began to descend to be called the first evening...and the second evening to be the real sunset” (p. 16 of Heck’s book). He believes these two evenings to be high noon and midnight.

Whether by accident or by intent to deceive, Heck chose not to quote the rest of Gesenius’ (p. 652) defining remarks on the phrase “between the two evenings,” which were that “according to the Karaites and the Samaritans (which is favoured by the words of Deut 16:6), the time between sunset and deep twilight.” While Heck’s book doesn’t tackle this material, some explanation is needed at this time for understanding.

The basic Passover law was laid out to Moshe (Ex 12:6; Lev 23:5; Num 9:3-5), when YHWH declared that the Israelites were to take a choice lamb on the 10th day of the first month (of Aviv) and set him aside until the 14th day of that month and sacrifice him (in the Hebrew) “beyn ha arebayn” which literally means “between the evenings” (“Englishmen’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance,” p. 976).

This phrase (in Ex 12:6) was to eventually become a point of confusion to Jews as well as Christians. Taken literally, between the two evenings would certainly be between sunset on one day and sunset on the next day. Assuredly, there is no other way to first address these words. And as one can later see in the manner that the impalement of YESHUA was handled, this literal interpretation has to make sense and prevail.

While many translations, like the KJV and others, chose to translate those words as “evening,” as if they were precisely the same as the Hebrew “ehrev,” meaning evening, others took a different view. For example, Samson Raphael Hirsch’s “The Pentateuch” (v. I, p. 133) gives them as “between the two evenings.”

Dr J. H. Hertz in the Soncino Edition of the “Pentateuch and Haftorahs” (p. 255) renders them as “dusk.” “Encyclopaedia Judaica” (v. 13, p. 170) reports the critical view that originally, between the evenings meant “at the setting of the sun.” Many other good translations use the words dusk or twilight for the phrase.

As Gesenius’ definition suggests, confusion did arise over these words.

The place that most Jews came to was stated in the “Pentateuch and Haftorahs” as “According to the Talmud, the ‘first evening’ is the time in the afternoon when the heat of the sun begins to decrease, about 3 o’clock; and the ‘second evening’ commences with sunset. Josephus relates that the Passover sacrifice ‘was offered from the ninth to the eleventh hour,’ i.e. between 3 and 5 p.m.” (Gesenius, p. 254).

Scriptural Clarification

If one does wish to try to check other uses of this phrase “beyn ha arebayn,” some interesting statements can be found. For instance, it was used by Moshe in describing the two times that the Israelites would eat their meals--one between the evenings or at dusk and the other at morning or daybreak (Ex 16:4-26).

While ehrev or evening is the same as ba ehrev or at even, Exodus 16 is interesting because it contrasts ehrev with between the evenings (beyn ha arebayn). In verses 6, 8 and 13, the quails came up and covered the camp at even while in verse 12 the people ate the quails between the evenings.

Obviously, the quails arrived at sundown. The people caught and cooked them and ate them between sunset and actual darkness. Other texts in Exodus 16 differentiate evening from morning when the manna came up over the night to appear as the morning dew (Ex 16:13-20). Dew is on the ground in the early morning hours and not at midnight or noon as Heck believes.

Later, YHWH told Yisrael to offer two lambs daily--one between the evenings and the other the next morning (Ex 29:38-42; Num 28:4-8). When ritual uncleanness occurred, the person was unclean until evening or sunset, the end of the day (Lev 11:24-40; 14:46; 15:5-27; 17:15; 22:6). It would be ridiculous to equate this time period to noon or some vague reference from noon to midnight.

In another case, Aaron lighted the lamps for the tabernacle between the evenings or at dusk (Ex 27:21; 30:8; Lev 24:2-3).

Actually, there was one continuous flame in the Tabernacle and from it, the several other lamps were lit daily, between the evenings (Ex 27:20-21, “Soncino [Jewish] Chumash,” p. 519). Again, there is a dusk period of time (after sunset) while it is still light for an hour or so before darkness sets in. This is called “beyn ha arebayn” in the Hebrew.

People in the US military know this dusk period as the evening nautical twilight. Obviously, the Passover was to be slain in this early portion of Aviv 14 (at or just after sunset and before actual darkness). This is the sunset time of the earlier mentioned Greek “epiphosko” (Matt 28:1; Lu 23:54) and the Hebrew “bo” (Deut 16:6).

The Passover Event

Once sacrificed, the Passover lamb was to be eaten sometime that same “night” (during darkness of Aviv 14), as the Word so states (Ex 12:8).

Also, the Israelites were told that the Messenger of Death would pass over them that same night (Ex 12:12), although the exact time of the Messenger’s pass over was not initially stated. Later, it actually happened at midnight of that same night of Aviv 14 (Ex 12:29).

Since there was some uncertainty about the exact hour that the Death Messenger would pass over and since it is questionable whether the Israelites had any methods of correctly identifying the time of midnight precisely, they all had to remain in their houses (protected by the blood on the doorposts) and not come out until morning or daybreak, when they could come out and burn the leftovers from the lambs (Ex 12:10).

That night, the Messenger (YHWH) slew Egypt’s firstborn and at some time (not stated, but obviously after midnight and before daybreak), Pharaoh cried and called for Moshe and Aaron (Ex 12:30-31). Since Moshe and Aaron perhaps would not have risked their lives to leave their homes, they may have went to Pharaoh around sunrise.

That daylight portion of Aviv 14 saw the Israelites burn the leftovers, collect their wages, pack up and get organized and ready to leave Egypt. With something in excess of two million people, this process took time. It was not done instantly, as some uninformed people suppose.

And if the reader doubts it, just look how long it takes virtually any military unit of size in the world to organize and move (usually days, weeks or months are needed, as the 1991 and 2003 Iraqi wars proved). It took six weeks to move 5,000 US military people to Albania for the Kosovo conflict in 1999.

Or alternatively, note how long it takes a large city of two million persons to partly empty at the close of a workday (and even as routine as this process is for people living in the suburbs, but working downtown). If all persons in a large city (men, women and children) had to totally pack up and move (lock, stock and barrel) from the city, it would be an enormous undertaking.

Hurricane Floyd struck the US in mid Sep 1999. Some 2.6 million people (with the convenience and ease of using automobiles) evacuated much of the East coast from Florida to North Carolina. This was the largest evacuation of American people in history. Literally, it took at least a couple of days to effect this movement. Cars were backed up for hours, almost bumper to bumper, on the roads leading West.

Please understand that this hurricane Floyd motion only involved people and not necessarily their household and personal effects. Can the reader possibly envision the enormous problems of getting ready and moving two and a half million people by foot with “all” of their personal possessions? If Moshe did this in 24 hours, he must be applauded. Well, he did it--with YHWH’s help!

Back to Egypt

After darkness, on the next night in Egypt, and during the full moon of Aviv 15, the Israelites commenced their journey out of the country (Ex 12:42; 13:3-4; Num 33:3; Deut 16:1). Their preparations and movement out produced the interesting spring festivals.

The first event was the Passover, as cited above (Lev 23:5). It is always a one day celebration involving unleavened bread on Aviv 14 (per a whole host of Scriptures). There are no Scriptures which would allow more than one day for Passover.

The Feast of Unleavened Bread is a seven days celebration of Yisrael’s actual Exodus from Egypt (Lev 23:6-8), starting on Aviv 15 and ending on Aviv 21, when Yisrael crossed the Red Sea--apparently by walking on top of frozen ice (from some type of an earth cataclysm), per the explanation of Dr Ernest Martin, formerly of Portland, Oregon (Ex 13:9; 14:15-31).

Therefore, eight days (of unleavened bread) are involved in total--the one day Passover festival and the seven days Feast of Unleavened Bread. This one and seven parallels the fall feasts of seven (Sukkot) and one (Last Great Day), totaling eight festival days.

The Talmud Changes

While the Word is clear enough on these festivals, the Judeans (probably Amalek-Edomites) by YESHUA’s time had changed them considerably.

“Encyclopaedia Judaica” (v. 13, p. 163) says that the Passover is a seven day festival starting on Aviv 15 and that correctly the feast consists of “two parts: The Passover ceremony and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Originally both parts existed separately; but at the beginning of the Exile they were combined” (ibid, v. 13, p. 169).

Thus, the Talmud cooked up the false theory that the first evening meant around 3 PM in the afternoon while the second one meant sunset. Gene Heck, discussed above, came along 2,000 years later and confused the words of the Talmud by trying to apply the first evening to high noon and the second evening to midnight.

This false belief allowed the Judean Jews (evidently sons of Satan-Kain) in rebellion against Moshe’s writings to legally kill the Passover on the afternoon of Aviv 14 (literally between the two evenings of sunset to sunset, as noted previously) and then go on to improperly eat the Passover meal at the night portion of Aviv 15 (thus, this Aviv 15 is the day on which they incorrectly observed their Passover ceremony).

So, with this change, the evil Judeans involved created a situation where the Passover ceremonies actually fell on two days. The Passover was sacrificed on the afternoon of Aviv 14 and the actual meal was eaten later during the night of Aviv 15 (despite all of the Scriptural references which say that both events are to happen on Aviv 14).

With this background, one can now understand the situation in the New Testament. In the early part of Aviv 14, at sunset, but before darkness set in, the apostles killed the Passover lamb (Matt 26:17). Sometime that night of Aviv 14, they ate the Passover (Matt 26:20, 26; Jo 13:2).

Please understand that the Greek “opsia,” used at Matthew 26:20 (for the time of evening when YESHUA sat down for the Passover), does not necessarily mean exactly sunset as the Hebrew ehrev does.

The corrupted Greek language, like other questionable Western languages, allows for some latitude with opsia meaning “late near sunset to nightfall” (“A Greek-English Lexicon,” p. 606; “The New Analytical Greek Lexicon,” p. 301). Probably, The MESSIAH and His disciples assembled in this dusk period, drank and enjoyed fellowship while the lamb was cooking (to be eaten later that night).

The rest of that night of Aviv 14 saw YESHUA’s anguish in the garden of Gethsemane, and His arrest and trial before the different authorities. He was hung on the stake at about 9 AM on Aviv 14 and died about 3 PM the same day--just about the time that the Judeans were killing their Passover offering.

Obviously, the phrase between the two evenings has to legally be right, as it can literally be understood from the end of Aviv 13 to just before the start of Aviv 15 since YESHUA’s death had to meet the legal requirements of the law in order for Him to be The PASSOVER. Any other explanation won’t hold water.

The Jews’ Passover in the NT?

However, numbers of uninformed and ignorant Christians have come along and tried to claim that YESHUA ate the Passover on the wrong night and that the next night (Aviv 15) was correct for eating it (as the evil Judeans were doing). And of course, Heck argues that The MESSIAH and apostles ate the Passover on the correct night (Aviv 14), but that He was impaled and died a day later.

Though the Passover festival of Aviv 14 is correctly a festival of YHWH The ELOHIM, it is interesting and obviously significant that the writer Yohanan habitually referred to the Judeans’ observance of it as the Judeans’ Passover (Jo 2:13; 6:4; 11:55)--because the evil Judeans and their followers had changed it--to eat it on the wrong night.

In fact, by the Jewish calendar, some of the other feasts were slightly changed as well, prompting Yohanan to also call them feasts of the Judeans. Problems with the Jewish calendar will be assessed in the succeeding chapters.

Leviticus 23:32, Revisited

A former chapter on pride discussed a friend of this writer who advertised himself as “Elder” so and so. One of the major points of difference between the elder and this writer was over which was the Scriptural day of the Passover. As outlined in previous comments, this writer takes the position that all of the Scriptures say Passover is Aviv 14. There is absolutely nothing to base Passover on Aviv 15.

As commented upon in the preceding chapter, the Jews long ago seem to have changed the Passover from Aviv 14 to Aviv 15 (which is correctly the first high Sabbath of Unleavened Bread--the day Yisrael started leaving Egypt). The best guess is that this incorrect Jewish thinking influenced a number of people over the years, including my “elder” friend.

As was elaborated upon in the previous chapters, my elder friend based Leviticus 23:32 as one of his arguments for Passover being on Aviv 15. He maintained that since the reference to the starting of the Day of Atonement was at the even of the ninth day in Leviticus 23:32, it meant that all references to Aviv 14 was in the context of the end or conclusion of the 14th day as it approached the 15th day.

At this point, the gist of the problem is that when a Scriptural day (which starts at evening) is named--is the meaning of that numbered or named day mentioned in the vein of the start of that day or is it the end or terminus of that day? Thus, if the Word refers to the 14th day, at even--is the message here the end of the 14th day or the starting of it?

In other words, do Scriptural references to a particular day refer to that day in the sense of its start or in its end? And this is a good question which will be answered in comments to follow.

In the case of my proud elder friend, the reality of the phrase “between the evenings” was pointed out to him. This is the normal reference to the Passover on Aviv 14. It is to be contrasted with just the “at even” message, which is associated with Ethanim 9 in the context of being the beginning of the 10th day.

Dennis Bitterman

Frankly, this writer has thought little more about the subject until working on this study at hand. One day, in early 2000, this writer received a copy of the “EAOY Newsletter” for Jan-Feb 2000 which broached this subject of whether a mentioned day is outlined in a beginning or ending sense.

The “EAOY Newsletter” presented a couple of word studies by Dennis Bitterman which very clearly seem to settle the issue at hand. These remarks were somewhat abbreviated. But they prompted me to also go back and look more carefully at the Hebrew words in the various texts.

“Young’s Analytical Concordance” (p. 696) says that the word “ninth” in Leviticus 23:32 comes from the Hebrew “tishah” which means “nine.” Young’s points out that there is another Hebrew word meaning ninth. It is “teshii,” used at Lev 25:22 and in the vein of the ninth year, month or day in several different texts (like Num 7:60; II Kg 17:6; 25:1; Jer 36:9; 39:1, etc).

The “Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon” (p. 781-782) notes that these words are cognates which come from the root “tesha,” which means “nine” (used many times in the Book). The “Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament” (TWOT) has a slightly different interpretation from Young’s on tishah. The TWOT (v. ii, p. 982) says that tishah means ninth (this appears to be the correct interpretation)

There is no denying that the words are related. But it is obvious that they are slightly different for some reason. Bitterman notes the presence of the “yod” in tishah with its absence otherwise. He then points out the similarity to yasha which means “salvation” and raises a question about whether the tishah in Leviticus 23:32 could be referring to “self evaluation” in the sense of the next day (Yom Kippur).

Dennis Bitterman concludes that this lone verse (Lev 23:32) is not a sole witness that numbered and cited days start or end at evening. The writer of this study at hand would not be dogmatic either. But it is certainly something to think and study about.

Samson Raphael Hirsch

“The Pentateuch” commentary (v. iv, p. 681-682) by the great Jewish sage Samson Raphael Hirsch addressed this word problem in Leviticus 23:32. Hirsch correctly notes the Jewish rule that days are reckoned from eve to eve and the fasting message for Yom Kippur (which occurs on Ethanim 10 in the Scriptural calendar).

But Hirsch goes further and offers some alternative ways of looking at the reference to the ninth day. He allows that the fasting must begin on the ninth day (that is, at a time that still belongs to the ninth day)--in the late afternoon before the arrival of sunset and the commencement of the 10th day.

In terms of Jewish practice, in starting the weekly Sabbath (discussed earlier), Jews actually start the Sabbath just before the 6th day officially ends. So perhaps Hirsch’s comments have relevance in that the Yom Kippur Sabbath (or at least, its fasting implications) must commence before the 10th day officially starts.

More Thinking

With this background, the writer of this study at hand will offer a few more ideas which could have pertinence in establishing the question of understanding whether a remark “at even” applies to the beginning of the just cited day or its end.

It seems that whenever a day is referred to (certainly, if in the context of being all inclusive from evening to evening), the meaning is clearly all of that day from evening to evening. For example, the seventh day Sabbath covers the beginning of the seventh day (at even) to its conclusion or terminus some 24 hours later at even. Thus, references to Passover on Aviv 14 are referring to all of that 24 hour day.

Part of the difficulty with the Ethanim 9 remark (in Leviticus 23:32) is that there seems to be some distinction here in the sense of whether the number is a cardinal number (in size like one, two, three or nine) or an ordinal number (in position and order, like in first, second, third, ninth).

As the TWOT illustrates, the tishah seems to be an ordinal number which represents position and sequence. The Hebrew tesha clearly means the cardinal number nine (which represents a collection or total of nine). Therefore, tesha is likely used in the vein of the cardinal number. Perhaps a reference to a cardinal number is a reference to it in the context of being all inclusive in total.

Thus, if the remark reads day nine (tesha), one would understand it to mean the totality of the ninth day from beginning to end. But Leviticus 23:32 has a kicker by using the ordinal number meaning ninth. Even the context does not suggest the totality of the ninth day. So, as a minimum, one must look at the ordinal number (in Lev 23:32), either as a start point or end point and no more to define the entire day involved.

This does not seem to be true with the usual Scriptural uses of cardinal numbers (as often with Aviv 14) which communicate all of the inclusive hours, minutes and seconds in the day cited (the totality of the day, from start to finish in a cardinal number).

But there are some more complications and especially on the number 14. The “Hebrew Primer and Grammar” (p. 165), by C. P. Fagnani and A. B. Davidson, indicates that beyond the number ten, the cardinal numbers are used for the ordinals. Furthermore, the “Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance” (p. 674) suggests that the masculine gender of four is usually the cardinal and rarely the ordinal.

The Hebrew text seems to read the same or almost the same in the sense of four and ten for 14 or 14th, without any appreciable distinction. Therefore, is it possible that in some instances the Hebrew text can be read the four and ten day (or day 14)?

The essence here is that based upon the Hebrew text, one apparently can read 14 as either a cardinal or ordinal number. This puts the burden on the translator to communicate sense and understanding in how he chooses to handle the problem. Usually, translators translate the four and ten day as the 14th day.

But they could be wrong in some instances. In terms of the 14 (day 14) or 14th day of Aviv (Passover), it appears that English translators do not seem to distinguish between the cardinal number, as opposed to the ordinal number in discussing Passover.

Going on from there, it would seem possible that both Samson Hirsch and Dennis Bitterman could be correct. Maybe, on the ninth day of Ethanim, in the late afternoon and just before sunset and the commencement of the tenth day (which is elsewhere identified as the Day of Atonement), the believer should go through a process of self evaluation in connection with the commencement of Yom Kippur.

In terms of the disagreement with the elder who chose to hang onto Leviticus 23:32 to say that references to day 14 or the 14th day of Aviv also meant an ending of the day, the essence here is that the Hebrew word for “ninth” obviously was used in the sense of the ending of the ninth and not the starting of it; while normally, the references would be to the starting of a day and/or both the starting and ending of a day.

Thus, here is just one more presentation which makes Passover be the totality of the 14th day of Aviv. Combine this factor with previous remarks on the meaning of the “between the evenings” phrase and it is clear that the Jews, the proud elder in question and a number of other so-called believers have got the wrong slant on truth, when trying to say that Passover falls on the 15th.

Until (the Hebrew Ad)

There is one more key point which needs mention in Exodus 12:6 and one which is especially germane to the Passover subject. The above cited Dennis Bitterman also teaches the relevance of the word “until” in the KJV (ad in the Hebrew). Of course, it takes no genius to figure out at once that the word until means the start of the 14th day and not 21 hours later or at the conclusion of the day (as it approaches the 15th day).

Manifestly, Exodus 12:6 says to keep the Passover lamb “until” the 14th day of Aviv and to kill it that day at evening. “Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary” defines the Hebrew ad as “prep 1) as far as, even to, until, up to, while, as far as 1a) of space 1a1) as far as, up to, even to.” For sure, this text suggests the slaying of the Passover at the start or early part of the 14th day. There is no other way to interpret this text.

One More Problem

Before leaving this theme, one more point needs mentioning. Some feast observers recognize Aviv 14 as both the Passover day and the first high Sabbath of Unleavened Bread. This view has it that the spring festival has solely seven days in it--from Aviv 14 to Aviv 20. Besides the fact that this belief will not hold up to the harmony in the several Scriptures on the issue (as clarified in Lev 23:5-8), there are other problems.

Proponents of this idea will not turn loose of the theory that the spring festival is the Passover only and with seven days--sometimes quoting Num 9:11 and 10:11 to try to prove that the second Passover had seven days in it (but as Lev 23 illustrates, the spring festivals involve a one-day Passover and a seven-day feast of Unleavened Bread--yes, one and seven, just as the last feasts have seven and one. Thus, Num 10:11 has nothing to do with Num 9:11. Similarly, Tabernacles and living in booths are always referred to in the Word as involving seven days and never as eight days).

Next, in the 41st year of the Exodus, when Yisrael entered the promise land, the sequence of events was the Passover (Aviv 14), next Aviv 15, and then Aviv 16, which was manifestly the day of the Wave Sheaf offering (Josh 5:10-12, as will be further addressed in a later chapter on the festivals). Per Leviticus 23:14-15, the day preceding the Wave Sheaf was a Sabbath day--which has to be Aviv 15.

Thirdly, the chronology of the death of YESHUA in 30 CE demands that He died on Passover day on Aviv 14 and that the next day, Aviv 15, was the high Sabbath when His disciples did rest, in accordance with the commandment (Mk 16:1; Lu 23:54-56, as was explained in a former chapter herein).

The Exodus Chronology

Finally, much of the day to day chronology of Exodus clearly lays out what happened for the first three months of the first year of the Exodus and establishes the general outline of the Scriptural calendar.

To appreciate this chronology, one must allow that the months then possibly involved 30 days each and not the 29 1/2 days now known to exist (although even in the present calendar situation, it is possible to have two 30-day months, back to back).

The chronology of Genesis 6-8 suggests that the year evidently was of 360 days with 12 months of 30 days each. The 30-day-month seems present during the Exodus, when considering the time period for mourning of the dead as a month (Deut 21:13) of 30 days (Num 20:29; Deut 34:8).

One more foundational point seems relevant. Apparently, the people under Moshe never traveled on the weekly Sabbath days. They probably rested those days.

Thus, the first day of the first month (Ex 12:2) seemingly occurred on a fourth day of the week (as will be established in comments to follow). The Passover of Aviv 14 (Lev 23:5) probably happened on a third day of the week. Aviv 15 came next, when the people started their movement out of Egypt during the night part of the 15th day (Ex 12:37-42; 13:3-4; Num 33:3; Deut 16:1).

They marched three days to reach the point where they were to keep their anticipated festival (Ex 3:18; 5:3; 8:27; 10:9). This means that they marched on Aviv 15, 16 and 17 and rested on Aviv 18, a Sabbath day (Ex 14:1-4).

Exodus 14:5 notes that Pharaoh was notified of Yisrael’s arrival at Pi-hahiroth, which means freedom--since the Israelites received their freedom that day (“Soncino Chumash,” p. 409). The “Chumash” adds that this event occurred when the Israelites reached their three days journey to keep their feast.

Pharaoh’s army overtook the Israelites at Pi-hahiroth--evidently on Aviv 20, a second day of the week (Ex 14:9). Clearly, they rested at Pi-hahiroth on Aviv 18-20. On Aviv 21, the third day of the week, Yisrael crossed the sea; and the Egyptian army was destroyed as it tried to follow them (Ex 14:15-15:21).

On Aviv 22, the Israelites resumed their journey for three days. Probably, they wanted to rest after crossing the sea; but Moshe compelled them to continue moving, against their will (Ex 15:22, per the “Soncino Chumash,” p. 419). So the Israelites continued moving on Aviv 22, 23 and 24 (Ex 15:22).

They came to Marah where they obviously kept the Seventh day Sabbath, rested and murmured (Ex 15:22-27). The “Chumash” (p. 421) suggests that at Marah YHWH gave the Israelites the statutes respecting the Sabbath. This surely occurred on the Sabbath of Aviv 25.

It is not clear how long that they stayed at Marah, but they eventually moved on to Elim where they may have stayed a couple of weeks or so (Ex 15:27). They then resumed their journey and came to the Wilderness of Sin on the 15th day of the second month (Ex 16:1-30). The 15th day of the second month (Ex 16:1) would have had to occur on the sixth day of the week (before sunset).

The next day, Ziw 16, they were on their Sabbath rest--during which time, they again murmured. YHWH then gave them quail after sunset on the first day of the week (Ex 16:13, at even, means of that day [at the end of the Sabbath]-- ”Soncino Chumash,” p. 525). The next morning, on the first day of the week, the seven-day count of the manna commenced.

Going on to Sinai, the Hebrew text of Exodus 19:1-2 indicates that they arrived on the first day of the third month (“Soncino Chumash,” p. 451); and by the already established calendar, a first day of the week (the Israelites certainly did not travel on the preceding Sabbath day).

Four days after the first day of the week takes one to the fifth day of the week (per the Exodus 19:3-11 daily count), the law was then given on Siwan 5, a fifth day of the week (Ex 19:12-25).

Since the giving of the law formed the basis for the later observance of Shavuot, this very event spells out the certainty that the day for the Wave Sheaf (Aviv 16) would also have fallen on a fifth day of the week (in order to allow the count of seven weeks or fifty days).

If the date for the Wave Sheaf was set on Aviv 16 (as happened, in the year of the Exodus), it places the high Sabbath the day before, or Aviv 15. Of course, Aviv 15 would be a high Sabbath to celebrate the actual commencement of the movement out of Egypt (which happened on Aviv 15). This event would suggest a feast day of celebration (Ex 12:42).

Not only does this chronology help clarify the first high Sabbath of Unleavened Bread as being Aviv 15, but it demands that the count to Shavuot start with Aviv 16 (the subject of making the 50-day count to Pentecost will be covered in detail in a later chapter herein).

The above chronology is predicated upon 30-day months for Aviv and Ziw. This defines Aviv one as occurring on the fourth day of the week. If by chance, one month was 29 days while the other was 30 days (which seems impossible, per the Scriptural chronology), it would allow Shavuot on Siwan 6, a 6th day of the week--which is the traditional view of Judaism (“Soncino Chumash,” p. 454).

Qumran, Revisited

Before moving on, it should be noted that the Qumran people evidently had the Passover-Unleavened Bread chronology in the right perspective. They had problems, but this was not one of them.

Despite some calendar difficulties (to be noted in the later chapters), the Essenes seem to have correctly observed Passover at twilight on “their” Aviv 14 and then kept a separate seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread, starting on “their” Aviv 15--with Aviv 15 as the High Sabbath (“The Dead Sea Scrolls, A New Translation,” p. 463).

Chapter 220--The Scriptural Calendar I

The Scriptural Luni-Solar Calendar

The validity of a luni-solar calendar is well established in the Book. Genesis 1:14-16 opens with a statement that both the sun and moon lights were made to observe the Scriptural feasts (Hebrew moed) and establish years (shanah in Hebrew).

Here, seasons in the KJV is a mistranslation of the Hebrew “moed” which means a “set feast” (referring to the annual feast days of the Word in Leviticus 23). Psalms 104:19 follows up with a charge that it is the moon which was appointed for seasons (Hebrew moed).

Solar calendars ignore the use of the moon and its cycle in the determination of Scriptural festivals and calendar events. Consequently, Genesis 1:14-16 and Psalms 104:19 demand the use of both the sun and moon to establish set feasts (hence, a luni-solar calendar). There is no alternative on this conclusion.

The 430-day witness of Yechezkel (Ezek 1:1-2; 3:15; 3:24-4:8; 8:1), if true, proves the periodic use of an intercalcary year of 13 months (noted earlier). Yechezkel’s trial started around the 12th-17th day of the fourth moon of the fifth year of Yehoyakhin’s captivity. It ended before or by the fifth day of the sixth moon of the sixth year--thus covering the believed 430 days. Clearly, this reference suggests an intercalcary year in a luni-solar calendar.

This writer has a friend who follows an unscriptural solar calendar. He refuses to accept the Scriptural luni-solar calendar because he says that he cannot find the word intercalcary or a definition of it in his “Bible.” This man refuses to consider the merits of Yechezkel’s’ time of trial over 430 days; which, on the surface, has to have materialized in a luni-solar year of thirteen moon-months.

Since this man is so obsessed with trying to find a particular English word and a precise definition of it in the Scriptures, one must pause and wonder how in the world can this man can go on to accept a solar calendar of 365 or 366 days when his “Bible” doesn’t have the words solar year or a definition therein of a solar year. Is this being hypocritical or what?

Finally, the solar calendar followed by most of these calendar deviants is predicated upon the first day of the month and first day of the year falling on or near the spring equinox.

In such a calendar, it makes Aviv 14 fall around April 2d. In 30 CE (the year of YESHUA’s death), April 2d was on a first day of the week in the Julian-Gregory calendar (“The Official Associated Press Almanac 1974,” no 1, p. 288). Clearly, this won’t mesh with the NT realties of His death and resurrection (as cited earlier).

The New Moon

Psalms 81:3 clarifies the start of the new moon with the establishment of Yom Teruah (the feast of the first day of the seventh moon, the Day of Trumpets) at the “time appointed” which in Hebrew is “kasah,” meaning to cover or conceal. The new moon is totally covered and concealed precisely at the astronomical new moon.

While few students of truth realize it, but the astronomical new moon is a totally observable phenomenon. Using a sextant, compass and similar devices, it is even possible to focus upon the fading old moon and to determine and accurately predict when the next astronomical new moon will occur (aside from the fact that astronomers have been calculating and publishing astronomical signs in almanacs for ages).

Samson Raphael Hirsch’s “Commentary on the Psalms” (v. II, p. 85) gives this Psalms 81:3 text (in the Hebrew Tanakh for Ps 81:4) as “But blow the Shofar at the New Moon, on the day of the veiling of the moon for the day of our festival.” Manifestly, Yom Teruah (the Day of Trumpets) is a day for the blowing of the trumpet--the Shofar.

Besides the astronomical new moon belief, there is a contrary argument on the start of the new moon from some students of the Word.

Some savants contend that there are historical records suggesting that the Second Temple Jewish authorities did not use a calculated calendar, but actually looked for the new moon each month in the form of the first visible crescent which comes after the astronomical new moon by 14 to 72 hours, depending upon several variables--like visibility and the position of the moon in conjunction.

In “Biblical Astronomy and the Calendar” (p. 25-41), writer Harold Hemenway quotes “Encyclopedia Britannica” and other authorities to try to prove that the new moon looked for and used was the first visible sign of the crescent. And while some of his comments make sense, the better view is that new moon probably means the astronomical new moon--for reasons cited above.

While there is some logic and possible authority to slip or delay the start of the new moon until the following night (dark hours), when the astronomical new moon condition occurs during daylight hours (as will be briefly described in later remarks on Jewish methods of slippage), this practice may not automatically justify any other delays--apart from Scriptural authorizations.

If there ever was a year which was really complicated on this issue, it was the year 2000 (which will be assessed in detail in later comments) since the astronomical new moon occurred around March 6th-7th which is just marginal for the start of a new year.

If this start date is too late, it shifts not only the new moon, but the new year a month later to April. If the crescent was looked for in 2000, it was visible around Mar 8th or 9th--which some people would have accepted as a more plausible date for the new moon starting the new year.

Moon Month

There are two Hebrew words translated as month in the Tanakh. They are chodesh and yerach. Yerach is a derivative of the Hebrew yareach, which means moon (“Young’s Analytical Concordance,” p. 667). In the KJV, yareach is commonly translated as moon while yerach appears as either moon or month. Specific months like Ziw, Bul and Ethanim are expressly identified as yerach (I Kg 6:37-38; 8:2).

Chodesh is another word which has caused some confusion since it has been translated as month or new moon. The terms chodesh and yerach are often apparent synonyms which are used interchangeably in the Word.

For instance, in I Kings 6:1, the month Ziw and the second month are from chodesh while the next reference to the month Ziw, in I Kings 6:37, comes from yerach (“Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance of the OT,” p. 404, 565).

Another duel situation occurs in I Kings 6:38 where the month Bul comes from yerach while the same eighth month comes from chodesh. In I Kings 8:2, the seventh month (chodesh) is identified as the month (yerach) of Ethanim. So, what’s the difference?

As noted above, yerach/yareach clearly links to the moon. In historic times, the word month was always derived from moon, apparently in all early civilizations (although it was to change in time in Egypt with her adoption of the sun worship, solar calendar).

The word chodesh is more complicated. The “Theological Wordbook of the OT” (p. 266) says it properly means new moon. Chodesh is from chadash which “Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon” (p. 263) gives as a meaning “to polish a sword...its primary sense is newness as that of cutting or polishing.”

Obviously, the renewal cycle of the illumination of each sequential and cyclic new moon offers in time “moon light” which appears as a newly polished sword that glistens in the sun light. Some scholars have suggested that yerach is the older term, which in later Scriptural years was slowly changed to chodesh.

This writer believes that both words are not precisely the same, although they are very close together and can sometimes be used interchangeably.

Based upon the idea that light shines from a newly polished sword, some scholars believe that the first visible crescent must be seen to represent the chodesh state. But does the beginning of the faint crescent really look like a sword or does such a sword image materialize still a few days later?

While chodesh is often translated as new moon and can be so used, it appears that the word has a broader meaning to cover the entire periodic and cyclic renewal of the moon’s illumination orbit which makes it very close to yerach (as found in the above numbered examples from I Kings).

Therefore, chodesh is not just the first visible crescent of the new moon. It is a larger, broader definition to cover the complete cycle of moonlight shining like a sword.

The Full Moon on the 15th

Though the kasah new moon is assuredly dark, it is interesting that the moon occurring on the 15th day of each month is a full moon which is demanded for the first day of unleavened bread on Aviv 15 since Yisrael left Egypt at night (Deut 16:1) in the full sight of the Egyptians (Num 33:3). Consequently, they were fully visible with the full moon.

This is a good point worth remembering. The full moon of the typical month comes on the 15th day of that moon/month by counting with the astronomical new moon as the first day. By waiting for the first visible crescent (which can be from 14 to 72 hours later), the fifteenth of the moon/month will often fail to occur on a full moon.

There is another reality which frequently dictates the start of the month with the astronomical new moon. Of course, it is this need for the 15th day of Aviv and Ethanim to be a full moon which also becomes a governing factor on the start of these months. Consequently, the seven-day Feasts of Unleavened Bread and Tabernacles end with only one quarter (of the moon) remaining (the end of the 21st day of the months).

The 15th day of the seventh month in the Scriptural luni-solar calendar is also fascinating for still one more reason.

The full moons nearest the spring and fall equinoxes literally cover the nights (that is that they come up just about the time of sunset and stay up all night until sunrise). It is only these two times during the year when the full moon rises at sunset and stays up all night to depart at sunrise. At all other times, the moon cycle at night does not always correspond exactly with the period of darkness.

Of these two times, it actually turns out that it is only the full moon of the 15th day of the seventh month which will always cover (kasah) the night with moon light with some regularity and certainty. Clearly, this is another implication of Psalms 81:3.

The same thing can sometimes be said for the full moon of Aviv 15th, but not always. The difference is that the full moon nearest the spring equinox is not always Aviv 15--since part of the time it is the full moon of the last month of the preceding year. This condition arises because the Aviv full moon must be the first full moon after the spring equinox.

Thus, if the Adar full moon falls a day or so just before the equinox, it will be the one which covers the night and not the later Aviv full moon.

Consequently, Aviv 15 is simply not always the full moon nearest the spring equinox (when the preceding full moon of the last month of the old year becomes the one nearest the spring equinox). In such cases, the Aviv 15th full moon can be so far away in time from the equinox that its cycle does not cover the night as the phenomenon suggests.

However, the issue in Psalms 81:3 is the festivals of the seventh month. In this case, the full moon of Ethanim 15 should always be the kasah full moon which covers the night.

Therefore

The importance of Psalms 81:3 (dictating that the dark part of Ethanim 15 falls on a full moon) combines with the reality that the dark part of Aviv 15 also should be a full moon to suggest that indeed the start of each moon should be established by the timing of the full moon. Thus, the 15th day of a given month should provide for a full moon during its dark portion.

Interestingly, the Church of Israel in Schell City, MO seems to calculate the beginnings of its calendar months by the full moon on the 15th. Since the full moon must be the 15th, it is simple to count back 14 days and determine the first day of that month. Normally, this process works out correctly to establish the month’s first day. But there can be rare times when a problem does surface.

If a month’s cycle is indeed near 29 1/2 days, this count back from the full moons will usually work out fine. But the problem comes up if the moon’s cycle is substantially greater or lesser than 29 1/2 days. If the cycle is 31 days (as can happen), it means that the first day of the month will not fall on the astronomical new moon, but a day or so later (perhaps with the visible crescent). This probably is a correct determination.

But the real problem surfaces when a moon’s cycle is 28 or 29 days which may theoretically produce the start of the month a day earlier than the astronomical new moon. Is it then correct to start the new month before the astronomical new moon? At this point in time, this writer is reluctant to start a new month before the astronomical new moon.

Ideally, the new month should start with the astronomical new moon. If the start date slips a day or so after the astronomical new moon, this writer does not necessarily reject that date. But a start before the astronomical new moon has to be put into the questionable category. Certainly, much prayer would be needed in those cases.

The New Year

The first month in the new year is Aviv (Ex 13:4). The word Aviv means “sprouting, budding,” per Young’s “Analytical Concordance” (p. 3). The spring sprouting and budding of vegetation is demonstrated from the Word in saying that the barley was in the ear and the flax was bolled at that time (Ex 9:31-32).

As Mark 4:28 suggests, this barley in the ear stage comes just before the full, mature grain is in the head for harvesting (see the “Complete Jewish Bible” for a good translation of this text). Logically, this is the beginning of the green ear state, which will be shortly assessed.

Since the festivals of the month of Aviv are closely linked to the spring harvest event (the barley harvest starts with Aviv 16), the historic Jewish position is that these occasions must fall no earlier than the spring equinox of Mar 19-22. If these feasts start earlier, they would be winter feasts and not spring festivals, as is demanded (“Biblical Astronomy and the Calendar,” p. 48).

The May-Jun 2002 “Prophecy Flash” (p. 71) had a reader’s letter which quoted Josephus as saying that the Passover had to take place in the zodiac sign of Aries (which is approximately March 21st to April 19th, depending upon exactly which day the equinox occurs, per the current Julian-Gregory solar calendar, “The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia,” p. 942).

Apparently, this was the Jewish position for the full moon of Aviv 15, which the Jews celebrated as the Passover. With the first full moon appearing on or after the spring equinox, one can conclude that the new year should essentially start with the new moon nearest the spring equinox (which is a practical general rule to usually follow on establishing the new year).

Green Ears

An article by Alan Mansager, on “Equinox or Barley,” in the Jun 1999 “Search the Scriptures” (p. 3-5), makes the case that the harvest starts with green ears because the word parched in Leviticus 23:14 rules out barley that is too dry, ripe or yellow.

Leviticus 23:14 does rule out eating (making bread) of the new year’s barley, if it is “parched.” But it also lays on a restriction on barley that is still too green, as well. Hence, this text is stipulating a precise point of ripeness where the first grain (to be cut) is beyond the first green state (when it first comes into the ear), but still not overly ripe and dry.

The “Jewish Chumash” (p. 400) is very specific for the Feast of Unleavened Bread in Exodus 13:4 (coming a few days later than Ex 9:31-32) by noting that Abib-Aviv means ripening of the harvest or first ripening or being fitted (for harvesting). Probably, barley ripens throughout Israel for the whole month. Thus, the month of Aviv is the month of the ripening of the barley harvest in Israel.

It makes sense that the beginning of the harvest would start with the first ripening of the barley. Since the barley harvest must start on Aviv 16, discussed above and briefly cited in a prior chapter, the first portion of the barley harvest (not necessarily all of it) would have to be sufficiently ripe to be harvested, starting on that day.

As Mansager’s article points out, there is only about a two weeks delay from the time that the barley reaches the initial green ears (perhaps this is when the barley is first in the ear) and the time that it yellows to ripe ears. This means that the barley must be in the ear and green around Aviv 1.

Thus, it would seem that the green ear state must be reached in early Aviv to allow the barley to be sufficiently ripened to permit harvesting, starting on Aviv 16 (obviously, at a point of not being too green or too ripe). Hence, Leviticus 23:14 is really specifying a precise place in time for the starting of the harvest.

Mansager also makes a good point by noting that the historic sun worship cults established their spring Easter celebrations based upon the vernal equinox. This same reality is what one finds in Christendom which establishes her pagan Easter observance on the basis of the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox.

The Barley is the Key

So while the day equal night phenomenon is generally indicative of Aviv, the ultimate key is in the status of the barley (which is crucial). The barley harvest is the beginning of the grain harvests worldwide in the Northern Hemisphere and is perhaps one of the most important signs of spring. Barley is in the ear and beginning to ripen in the early spring in the Middle East (late March and early April).

In Yisrael, it matures first in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea (North to Jericho) to provide the first cuttings of the year for the Wave Sheaf Offering. As Leviticus 23:14 demands, that first cutting in the lower Jordan Valley must be beyond just the green stage and not yet at the parched state of ripening.

However, there seems to be some possibility that there can be some variation on when the barley reaches this acceptable stage of development for the harvest to start.

This condition was brought out in the above quoted reader’s letter in the May-Jun 2002 “Prophecy Flash” (p. 71) which noted that Alfred Edersheim (“The Temple Its Ministry and Services,” p. 204) said that the Sanhedrin planted the barley seventy days before Passover (so it would be ripe at the proper time).

On this quote, Edersheim also noted that the ground was ploughed in the autumn (before the autumn rains came on or about Oct 15th) and then the barley was sown later, seventy days before Passover. Obviously, in this context, the Sanhedrin was working with a known/determinable calendar which must have still allowed some possibility for variation on the planting date, depending upon weather/climate factors.

Other Festivals Affected Also

Not only must the Scriptural new year start correctly to allow the spring barley harvest, but there are also issues over the other two harvests as well. The Shavuot festival involves an offering from the first or start of the late spring, wheat harvest (Ex 23:16; 34:22). Though wheat is sown at the same time as barley, it ripens about two months later (“Encyclopaedia Judaica,” v. 16, p. 480).

Manifestly, Sukkot must come at the end of the harvest year or cycle (Ex 34:22), and after gathering in from the threshing-floor and the winepress (Deut 16:13, per “The Soncino Edition of the Pentateuch and the Haftorahs,” p. 817). A number of other texts also make it clear that Sukkot must “follow” the conclusion of the great summer harvest of grain and fruit (Ex 23:16; Lev 23:39).

There is a tendency among some believers (including this writer on occasion) to call the final yearly harvest the fall harvest. This is not technically correct because the final harvest of the fruit is Scripturally defined as the summer harvest. Jeremiah 8:20 notes a linkage between the passing of summer and the end of the harvest. Clearly, this summer harvest should be (totally or generally) completed before the fall equinox.

Possibly, it is this reality which has prompted the Jews to take a general position that the full moon of Sukkot must come after the fall equinox (“Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period,” p. 613). However, even the current calculated Jewish calendar does not abide by this restriction because Yom Teruah can come anytime from Sep 4th on (in 1614, Yom Teruah did fall on Sep 4th, per the Jewish calendar).

To have Sukkot this early (Sep 18th), it means that the new year had to have started around March 9th (which seems to be about the earliest apparent date that the Jewish calculated calendar allows for Aviv 1 (per the current Julian-Gregory solar calendar).

Obviously, the determination of the first month of the new year will affect not only Passover, but the other harvest festivals as well. Care must be exercised in this determination. This situation could have been one of the reasons that YESHUA had in mind in saying that the scribes and Pharisees sit in Moshe’s seat. Someone must have the authority to determine this complex point in time.

While the condition of the barley harvest (which is often predicated upon its sowing date) and the implied timing for the other harvests (as well, to a lesser extent) seem to be the crucial overriding principles in establishing the new year, there can be problems even here because all believers do not live in Israel or may not have access to information on the condition of the harvests and weather/climate in a particular year.

Manifestly, if a believer cannot ascertain the status of particularly the barley (and the other harvests, based upon empirical knowledge) in a given year, the astronomical signs of the new moon nearest the spring equinox must logically apply. However, the believer must use his head on this issue.

More on the New Year

As noted above, the year is Scripturally prescribed in Genesis 1:14-16 where the word year comes from the Hebrew “shanah,” meaning a repetition, the course of the sun or of the seasons--spring, harvest and winter. The year’s end is identified in the Hebrew word “tekufah” (or koophah), meaning a revolution or circuit (“Young’s,” p. 298).

This Hebrew tekufah is translated “end,” as in year’s end at Exodus 34:22. It also appears at I Samuel 1:20, II Chronicles 24:23 and Psalms 19:6 (“Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance,” p. 1356). “Encyclopaedia Judaica” (v. 5, p. 46-47) indicates that it correctly means the seasons, referring to the circuit around the sun, starting from the spring equinox (Mar 19-22) to the next spring equinox (Mar 19-22).

Exodus 34:22 suggests that the festivals have to occur once a year in this circuit or cycle. Obviously, if the festivals actually started before the spring equinox, then it could create a condition where some festivals could be observed twice in one year (one circuit around the sun) and/or not at all in another year.

The conclusion is clear. The actual year must provide for one observance (and no more) of each of the festivals in one circuit around the sun. This fact alone demands the intercalcary process and the starting of the actual feasts on or following the spring equinox. The first festival in this cycle is Passover, which occurs on Aviv 14, and the last one is the Last Great Day (Ethanim 22), to be covered in the next chapter.

The Year’s End

Thus, tekufah (or koophah) is used at Exodus 34:22 (and II Chronicles 24:23) to demonstrate the end of the year or completion of the sun’s circuit (around the heavens). Tekufah is also used elsewhere to seemingly communicate the revolution of days in a year.

The way Exodus 34:22 is worded (in the KJV) might make a reader suppose that tekufah or koophah comes “at” the festival of Sukkot since that time is the Scriptural end of the agricultural year (and this reasoning could well be correct). Many Jewish commentators make the point that Sukkot must come at (or just after) the “turn of the year” (in reference to the fall equinox).

While this usage in Exodus suggests that tekufah falls exactly at the end of the agricultural year (at a precise moment in time--at the autumnal equinox), the case can be made that it runs from one spring equinox and barley in the ear to the next spring equinox and the next occurrence of barley in the ear in the Middle East (as will be described in the following chapter).

Manifestly, the new year starts with the month of Aviv in the spring, “near” the spring equinox phenomenon. There seems to be no alternative on this issue.

Chapter 221--The Scriptural Calendar II

EAOY, Revisited

The Nov/Dec 2001 “EAOY Newsletter” (p. 2) addressed the question of starting the new year and added that the new year must start early enough to allow Passover to occur by the spring equinox and in order for Sukkot to arrive at the year’s end (or at the turn of the agricultural year, at the fall equinox when the law was to be read during Sukkot, and at the end of seven years--Deut 31:10-13).

In a follow-up mode, the Jul/Aug 2002 “EAOY Newsletter” (p. 3-12) was very clear in building a case that tekufah in Exodus 34:22 means year’s end at the autumnal equinox. To support this view, EAOY offered a slightly different interpretation on some of the words and ideas associated with the seventh month’s ending feasts.

In Exodus 23:16 and 34:22, the fall festival is described as the Feast of Ingathering (the Hebrew “asiph,” per Young’s “Analytical Concordance,” p. 514), in reference to the summer harvest. Yet, other references (like Lev 23:34 and Deut 16:13) seem to refer to the harvest feast as the feast of tabernacles (the Hebrew sukkot [ibid, p. 105, 953], which actually means a booth).

The Jews and virtually all Messianic believers who observe the festivals accept the idea that the Feast of Ingathering and Tabernacles are one and the same.

However, the Jul/Aug 2002 “EAOY Newsletter” distinguishes between these two references and says that Ingathering is actually the “Last Great Day” (the so-called eighth day which is also cited in John 7:37). The Jews observe this eighth day as Shemini Atseret. The Talmud says that this eighth day is actually a separate festival (B. Suk. 47b-48a, as cited in “A guide to Jewish Religious Practice,” p. 169).

Interestingly enough, the Talmud is correct here because the mitzwah to dwell in booths is always for seven days only and not eight days (Lev 23:42).

So we correctly have the seven-day Feast of Booths and then a separate one day festival called Shemini Atseret (or the Last Great Day)--making a total of eight days (seven and one), which compare with the spring feasts of one day (Passover) and seven days (the Feast of Unleavened Bread).

More From EAOY

EAOY makes the case that it is this Last Great Day which marks the end of the year (while EAOY usually cites this end in the vein of the end of the agricultural year, EAOY also makes it clear that it is the end of the harvest year that started in the spring with Passover and the Wave Sheaf Offering)--by saying that “the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Aviv 15, ed) will always be after the vernal equinox (beginning the harvest year) and the Last Great Day of the Feast of Tabernacles will always be after the autumnal equinox (tekufah) ending the crop harvest season.”

In this statement, there is an obvious implication (though not actually stated as such by EAOY) that the seven days feast of tabernacles (or booths) could conceivably fall before the autumnal equinox--as long as the Last Great Day occurs on or after the autumnal equinox.

Of course, EAOY could be correct in attributing Ingathering strictly to the Last Great Day (Shemini Atseret).

But regardless, it may not directly impact upon the present discussion on the calendar, per se. In other words, interpreting the feast only with Booths or only with Shemini Atseret will not alter the likelihood that EAOY is correct in charging that the last festival day in the cycle must end on or after the autumnal equinox.

Undoubtedly, EAOY is correct on its statement of starting the harvest season and the annual festivals with the spring equinox and ending them both with the autumnal equinox. Since months have to be observed on the basis of the moon’s cycle, the harvest and feasts do not always start or end precisely on the two equinoxes. But the point is that they will always start and end on or just “after” the equinoxes.

In another matter, some feast day keepers have recently made the case that the new year starts with the first new moon following the spring equinox and others argue that the festivals have to be in the so-called spring and fall seasons (both of these options will be discussed at some length in the following chapter).

As the Nov/Dec 2001 “EAOY Newsletter” notes, (p. 2) these reasonings will not allow Sukkot to fall properly near the fall equinox (at the agricultural year’s end). The Jul/Aug 2002 “EAOY Newsletter” (p. 5) says that the shifting of a moon before or after the tekufah is not paying attention to all Scripture and doing what is right in one’s eyes.

Other Views

In another view on this subject, Harold Hemenway makes the point that the Hebrew tekufah in Exodus 34:22 really says “after” and not “at” (“Biblical Astronomy and the Calendar,” p. 44) So the case can be made that year’s end comes “after” Sukkot and/or the autumnal equinox (actually some months after at the next spring equinox).

The technical vernal equinox occurs at about March 19th-22nd--when the sun crosses the celestial equator, causing the day to equal the night at that point (Funk & Wagnalls’ “Standard Desk Dictionary,” p. 214). Most often, the equinox occurs on March 21st. But its Julian-Gregory date depends much upon how leap years are handled (with February having 29 days).

In some rare situations, the equinox can slightly vary from March 21st (as it did, by the way, in the year 2000, as will be assessed in subsequent remarks). Therefore, it can come as early as March 20th and possibly even March 19th. Presumably, March 22nd is another rare possibility.

Conversely, the observable astronomical sign of the new year (day equal night phenomenon in the Northern Hemisphere) can occur from a few hours up to a day or two later from the technical vernal equinox. Certainly, “day equal night” is the sign in the Jerusalem area where the festivals were Scripturally first commanded and kept on a recurring basis.

The same is true in Northern Egypt (where the issue of Passover first surfaced) and in the Euphrates Valley in Iraq (which was the likely site of creation and probably is the place where the new day, new week, new month and new year should start). Actually, the areas of Egypt, Palestine and Iraq are very close together and produce almost the same calendar conclusions. Thus, there really is no reason to argue the differences.

So--although the technical vernal equinox occurs around March 19-22, the effective day equal night in the lands of Scriptural Yisrael (and even of the modern House of Yisrael nations) in the Northern Hemisphere does not always occur until about March 20-23.

Obviously, the visible sign (watched for and observed) has to be day equal night (in the Middle East), which is usually March 20th to the 23rd. The exact solar day (per the Julian-Gregory calendar) when this event occurs, depends, of course, on exactly when the vernal equinox occurs (at the equator).

Creation Calendar

Since the sun and moon were created (or reconfigured) on the fourth day of the week (Gen 1:14-19) and since the moon merely reflects sun light, the sun would have had to be in orbit and shining on the daylight portion of the fourth day of (re)creation week at the Euphrates (or Jerusalem).

Hence, the (correctly invisible) astronomical new moon would not have occurred until the dark portion of the succeeding fifth day of the week. An explanation of how this came about will now be outlined.

By concluding that the day equal night “sign” was the sign of the sun (required in Genesis 1:14) for the festivals, it seems factual that the day equal night phenomenon had to have occurred during the time of the recreation week of Genesis 1.

Strangely enough, there is one primary remark suggesting the spring vernal equinox in this first chapter of Genesis. It occurs in Genesis 1:4-5 when The ELOHIM seemingly established the sun to provide light on an orbiting earth. The MOST HIGH “divided” the rotating earth into two parts--day and night.

The implication in this “division” is that YHWH divided the day and night into equal parts. Precise equal parts must come at the spring or fall equinoxes. Since spring is the time for the regeneration of life, the event had to be the vernal equinox. This event concludes the first day (apparently of 24 hours as man now calculates time).

On the second day, The HIGHEST divided the waters and established the atmospheric heaven to exist between the waters in orbit around the earth and those on the earth (Gen 1:6-8, which is discussed in other chapters herein). The next day, the third day, He apportioned the water on earth into seas and brought forth dry land and ultimately vegetation on that land (Gen 1:9-13).

The Sun and Moon

Now, the real revelation about the calendar and festivals occurs in Genesis 1:14-19 on the fourth day of creation week. For the first time in the narrative, the moon appears. Thereupon, The ELOHIM designates the sun to rule the day and the moon to rule the night. He then went on to establish the fact that these two lights would determine His festivals or set apart times (in the word seasons [the Hebrew “moed”] of Gen 1:14).

What this amounts to is that while the sun is important in regulating the festivals, the moon assumes center stage in establishing the times for those festivals. Thus, the sun lays out the general times of the year for those festivals, but it is the moon which precisely dates them (this fact is brought out in Exodus 12 and later remarks which define the Scriptural calendar, as discussed elsewhere herein).

The context and wording of Genesis 1:14 also would allow that this fourth day was just after the vernal equinox and perhaps near the day equal night event in the Northern hemisphere. However, the fact is that the sun and its precise division at the equinox seems to have already been established in Genesis 1:4; thus, discounting such an event in Genesis 1:14.

Therefore, it is possible that the sun and moon remarks in Genesis 1:14 do not address the equinox in that time frame, but in a general concept of future time periods when the sun and the moon would rule over the day and night. Truly, the focus in Geneses 1:14 is upon the relationship of the sun and moon ruling the day and night.

Obviously, this relationship is continuous all year long and not just at the vernal equinox. So correctly, the division of sun (ruling the day) and moon (ruling the night) was not precisely equal (in the sense of the vernal equinox) on the fourth day of creation week, nor were they precisely equal in time during the coming months until the later fall equinox.

If the vernal equinox occurred on the first day of that creation week, it stands to reason that the day equal night phenomenon in the Northern hemisphere occurred within a day or so later (in the Middle East near the Euphrates or at Jerusalem). Probably, day equal night was already past by the fourth day of the week in Genesis 1:14.

Because the status of the moon is only determinable in relation to the sun, it is very likely that this first astronomical new moon occurred during daylight hours (as cited above). Of course, as demonstrated elsewhere herein, the daylight hours occurrence kicks the visible astronomical condition of new moon (of no light) to that night (which automatically takes one to the fifth day of the week).

The First Aviv One

The first day of that first moon or monthly cycle (starting at sunset and occurring on the fifth day of the week) would have possibly been the night of March 24th-25th (per the present Julian-Gregory calendar), on the premise that the vernal equinox occurred around March 20th.

Anyway, the gist of these remarks is that based upon the Genesis account, it would be very plausible to date the first day (with the new moon) of the new year at creation to March 25th. In that sense, it is possible that the later Israelite settlers of Britain correlated this information when the Julian calendar was imposed upon them. Maybe, that is the reason that they arbitrarily chose to start their new year on March 25th.

Of course, they ignored and passed up the tremendously important reality of the moon and the moon’s cycle to establish both the yearly calendar and the festivals. But at least, they were close to the Julian-Gregory solar calendar aspects of Genesis 1.

The 14th Day of Aviv

Furthermore, this sequence of events in Genesis 1 would have allowed the 14th day of Aviv to occur on a fourth day of the week, which is significant for another reason to follow.

As established earlier, from the Scriptures, it is also possible to determine the calendar in general at the time of the Exodus (from the chronology of the book of Exodus) and during the final days of the life of The MESSIAH in 30 CE (from the three days and three nights phenomenon of Matthew 12:38-40).

At the death of YESHUA, the same general calendar outline seems to have prevailed as in Genesis 1. Aviv 14 fell on the fourth day of the week and the new year apparently started on the fifth day of the week, just after the spring equinox, as it now seems possible to date (as outlined in a former chapter on the Sign of YESHUA).

Probably, Aviv 14 fell on the third day of the week at the time of the Exodus (as discussed earlier), but there is some possibility that the new year started about the time of the spring equinox (at least, it would have been logical at that important time).

While not being able to precisely date the actual vernal equinox at YESHUA’s death or at the Exodus, the possibilities remain interesting. Of course, such information could be theoretically calculable by astronomers, if the exact years can be ascertained.

One significant problem on this theme is that the vernal equinox can appear from March 19 to March 22 (based on the Julian-Gregory calendar). In the old days of just the Julian calendar, the variation was even more extreme. The problem is that the current solar year is about 365 and 1/4 days which causes some flux or movement in the solar date for the vernal equinox.

Thus, all of the Julian-Gregory dates for the vernal equinox have to be approached on an approximate basis since there can be some variation on dating the events.

In this vein, this writer believes that the Aviv new moon for 30 CE (the year of the death of YESHUA) must be dated by the Julian calendar to around March 23d or 24th (as discussed earlier). Could the vernal equinox have occurred around March 20th that year? Or perhaps even March 18th, 19th, 21st or 22d cannot be ruled out since the calendar involved was the Julian calendar and not the Julian-Gregory calendar.

The point is that the astronomical conditions at the creation and at YESHUA’s death were very close together. As a minimum, they both had a new moon and a first day of the new year falling on the fifth day of the week, and apparently following the vernal equinox by two to five days. The year of the Exodus could have been similar on the equinox, though the new moon probably is dated to the fourth day of the week.

Again, as pointed as before times, the fact that the first day of the weekly cycle started first, earlier and independently of the creation or revelation of the sun and moon in Genesis 1 and 2, proves that the first day of the week cannot be tied to a first day of a month or year. The cycles are utterly different and cannot be forced together.

Names of the Months

While still in the discussion stages of this presentation on the calendar, it would be well to take a moment and relate the Scriptural names of the months to the Jewish use of names. Actually, some of these names have already been cited in previous chapters, but this presentation will serve as a recap.

It should be noted that the Scriptures do name most of the months, but not all thirteen of them. Some of these names surfaced before the Jewish exile to Babylon while others were mentioned after the exile.

Furthermore, it is important to note that during the exile, the Jews picked upon the names of the months as used by the Babylonians. To this day, this Babylonian influence has persisted among almost all of the world’s Jews. In any case, the Jewish names determined in Babylon will also be outlined herein for a comparison with the Scriptural statements. These names of the months can be stated as follows:

Babylonian

Number Scriptural Scriptural Jewish

of Month Names Reference Names

1 Aviv Exodus 13:4 Nisan

2 Ziw I Kings 6:1 Iyar

3 Siwan Esther 8:9 Siwan

4 none Jeremiah 52:6 Tammuz

5 none Jeremiah 52:12 Av

6 Ellul Nehemiah 6:15 Ellul

7 Ethanim I Kings 8:2 Tishrie

8 Bul I Kings 6:38 Heshvan

9 Kislew Zechariah 7:1 Kislew

10 Teveth Esther 2:16 Teveth

11 Shevat Zechariah 1:7 Shevat

12 Adar Esther 3:7 Adar I

13 none Adar II

It seems to be likely correct that a person can refer to the fourth, fifth and thirteenth months as the Fourth Month, Fifth Month and Thirteenth Month. And conceivably, one could support a reference to the thirteenth month as Adar II.

On the Jewish names, they were largely picked up by the Jews while in the Babylonian exile. Some of them are Scriptural names (in that they are stated in the Scriptures), but some of them have no Scriptural basis at all and are totally pagan to the core (i.e., Tammuz was the name of a Babylonian deity).

However, use of the Babylonian names otherwise seem definitely out, except as they have been used in the Scriptures. Normally, this writer uses the Scriptural references as being proper.

While this Jewish use of corrupted names for their calendar prevails to this day among religious Jews, it is clearly not YHWH’s way (since the words are unscriptural). Therefore, these names should not be used (except for possibly Adar II, which might can be justified).

There are other features of the Jewish calendar which are at odds with the Scriptural calendar. These issues will be addressed and commented upon in a subsequent chapter.

Chapter 222--Calendar Changes and Confusion

Other Disruptions

While the outlined calendar manipulations, changes, confusion and problems, described in the former chapters, seem to be the most prevalent ones, they are certainly not the only ones. As limited, little men can dream up and scheme methods of disrupting the Scriptural calendar, they do so.

Actually, one of the classic changes initiated by the prevalent sun worship culture has been to start a new day at midnight, instead of the Scriptural sunset, as noted earlier. This one, as ridiculous as it is, stuck because merchants, bankers and businesses generally liked all daylight hours bearing a common date for obvious profit reasons. Money is always the name of the Christian game!

Therefore, businesses can date transactions all the same during normal, working, daylight hours. Since money is the name of the game, this calendar scheme stuck and became the mode of sun worshippers.

Moreover, there is actually a movement under way by a limited number of people to try to claim that the new day starts with morning or sunrise and not sunset, as the Word dictates (at Lev 23:32). This one would also be in serious conflict with what the Word outlines (as discussed in a prior chapter on the Gene Heck idea of the new day starting at noon).

Changing the Weekly Cycle

One of the classic acts of stupidity arises when some so-called believers theorize that if the first day of the month is established by the moon cycle, then the first day of the first month of the new year should constitute the first day of the week, as if all of these first days have to fall on exactly the same day.

With a constant change of the weekly cycle each year, there is then a yearly disruption of the weekly cycle producing a new Sabbath day annually.

This bouncing Sabbath means that the last week each year preceding the change will be a variable week (long with eight or nine days or short with one or two days) in contrast to the other weeks of seven days (since there are 365 or 366 days per year; while 52 weeks of exactly seven days only equals 364 days, leaving an extra day or two each year to address).

Of course, anything different from the repetitive seven-day cycles produces a week dissimilar to creation week (Gen 1-2) and in conflict with the fourth commandment of the Decalogue, requiring six days of work and one day of rest (Ex 20:8-11). If a week is different from seven days, it means that the believer can’t possibly work six days and rest the seventh day, as outlined by YHWH.

Actually, the weekly cycle is utterly independent of the month and year cycles so that this specious reasoning of a floating Sabbath won’t hold water. Also, creation week itself in Genesis 1-2 proves that the weekly cycle is utterly independent of the month and year (as outlined by the sun and moon).

But the advocates of this belief, who persist in believing it and teaching it as truth to others, cause mass confusion among some persons (who claim that they want to obey The MOST HIGH). While space is too limited in this study to examine this stupid belief in any detail and cite the Scriptural reasons why it is false, it should be brought up (as now done) and laid to rest with a minimum of response.

There is one primary problem (and many secondary ones) in this crazy thinking. This main problem is that the book of Exodus lays out sufficient calendar information in such a fashion that a person can take this data and construct the Exodus calendar.

In such a construction, it seems possible to prove that the first day of the first month of Aviv (Ex 12) fell on a fourth day of the week. And in terms of the equinox that year, perhaps something similar happened as occurred in the years of the creation (Gen 1) and of the death of The MESSIAH (as covered in preceding discussions).

Besides trying to calculate the weekly Sabbath on the basis of the new moon starting the year, there is another interesting alteration which some people teach.

Some people actually want to make the new moon each month a weekly Sabbath (with each of the following seven days counted as weekly Sabbath days until the next new moon when the weekly cycle starts new all over again). Obviously, this ridiculous thinking gives one both a new Sabbath and a disruption of the weekly cycle every month.

Changing the Month

Beyond the attempted changes affecting the definition of a day, it should also be noted that even in terms of the luni-solar calendar, a number of people have come along to try to change the start of a month.

The Scriptures clearly teach the start of a new month with the astronomical new moon. Yet, a group of persons are now trying to promote a belief in the full moon as being the first day of a month, instead of the new moon.

Even by accepting the new moon as the start place, a number of other people try to argue over what constitutes new moon and which new moon becomes the first month of a new year.

Some say that the new moon occurs when the moon’s first sliver is visible at an observer’s location (but this makes the whole process subjective and unscriptural since it is clear in the Book that the new moon day was known in advance and not following a subjective determination--I Samuel 20:5 and 18).

Still other persons take some other stance over the new moon or something else to cause conflict and question.

Therefore, it must be pointed out that a number of alleged believers have went to the extreme in the last several years of being ridiculous in attempts to try to change the days, weeks and months in some fashion to disrupt the cycles to cause persons to worship at wrong times. As noted before, these efforts appear to be demonically inspired and directed.

Changing the New Year

The Sardis Sacred Name movement has devoted much attention to the calendar question over the last several years. This focus has prompted some of the Sacred Namers to produce at least a couple of variations in the start of the new year.

As briefly allowed in the prior chapter, one group in the Sacred Name motion came up with the idea that the new year had to start with the first new moon following the vernal equinox. Another group came up with the belief that Passover had to fall in the “spring” season and that Sukkot had to occur during the “fall” season. These two approaches will now be addressed.

The problem with both of these ideas is that if one is not careful, he can lean in the direction of procrastinating and pushing the feasts too late into the year. Judgmental people and certainly farmers want the feasts to occur as quickly as possible in the cycle since there are always risks of agricultural losses if things are unnecessarily delayed (from adverse weather or something else).

One of the difficulties that the US Western migration faced over the historic Oregon Trail is that procrastinators could find themselves trying to cross the Blue Mountains in Eastern Oregon in a snowstorm (with horses and wagons, this would be a catastrophe beyond description). There was great pressure on to speed up and do everything as fast as possible in the Western trek.

The “Oxford Companion to the Bible” (p. 18) indicates that the dry season in Palestine was from April 15th to October 15th. The autumn (early) rains started around October 15th. This means that ideally the harvest had to be completed, Sukkot was over, and the plowing of the fields was finished by October 15th (the plowing had to be done in the dry season before the rains started).

Since the harvest was technically the summer harvest, it meant that the harvest had to be generally completed (except for perhaps the olives which could run late) before the autumn equinox (which is around Sep 20-23). Often the new year and Yom Teruah came at the right times for all of these qualifications to happen satisfactorily. But the problem comes up if one tries to start the new year too soon or too late.

There is another issue here which must be acknowledged (although Christians won’t understand it or care one way or the other about it). The festival of Sukkot involves “living in booths” for seven days. Booths are wonderful in the desert to keep the hot sun off of a person. But in a rainy environment, there is no joy in trying to live and exist in a booth of foliage and tree limbs (and especially if poorly constructed).

Sukkot is a time of joy and happiness. The very idea of Sukkot “suggests” that the festival is to be observed before the autumn rains commence. Therefore, there is great pressure to complete Sukkot by October 15th.

Moreover, there is the condition of the kasah full moon which must cover the first night of Sukkot with light (Ps 81:3), as described in a preceding chapter. This kasah condition cannot occur if either of these two delayed methods of starting the new year are followed. In other words, a full moon Sukkot in late October is too late to fulfill Psalms 81:3.

There is still one more powerful reason why Sukkot must fall at or just after the fall equinox. In I Kings 12:33, Yarovam established a sun worship festival on the 15th day of the 8th month to take the place of YHWH’s Sukkot on the 15th day of the 7th month.

When the new year starts at or just after the spring equinox, it makes Yarovam’s feast fall right at or near Halloween. Manifestly, Halloween is the classic Christian fulfillment of Yarovam’s sun worship feast.

Since Halloween is established in the sun worship solar calendar to occur at the end of October, it means that ideally the best calculation for the new year (starting at or just after the spring equinox) cannot be delayed too long.

If there is too much delay for the new year in the spring, it forces YHWH’s Sukkot to fall near the heathen Halloween celebration and Yarovam’s fall festival to be thrust even further into the year. Obviously, this is not the way The ELOHIM designed and ordained His calendar. Sukkot must take place some days before the heathen Halloween celebration honoring Yarovam’s sun worship feast.

More on Changing the Year

The situation with the Jewish calculated calendar has been noted in the preceding remarks and will be further addressed in the following chapter. The Jews have a general rule to try to observe the full moon of Sukkot after the autumn equinox. But practically speaking, they vary on this a few days since Yom Teruah can come as early as Sep 4th--making Sukkot start on Sep 18th (before the fall equinox).

Thus, it would seem that the rule the Jews really follow is that Sukkot cannot be completed before the autumn equinox. So the feast can start as long as it is not finished until after the equinox. Of course, this means that at the most, Sukkot can only overlap into summer by a few days (one to five days). Since the fruit harvest is the summer harvest, will it be completed by five days before the equinox? Perhaps yes!

Well, the issue here is the weather and climate factors for a given year. Probably, the summer harvest is largely completed several days before the equinox. Again, there is the pressure to get everything done before the rains start (around Oct 15th).

Obviously, if the new year starts with the new moon after the vernal equinox, it can mean a start of the new year as late as April 21st which would make Yom Teruah appear around Oct 15th (with Sukkot starting on Oct 29th). Manifestly, this seems to be, on the surface, entirely too late in the year (as established in the above remarks).

In terms of the other alternative (of the keeping of YHWH’s feasts in the spring and fall seasons), there can be equally troubling points. In the first place, the seasons do not seem to be defined in the word (for sure, autumn or fall does not seem to be defined or even discussed, beyond the word “tekufah”).

While the English word “season” is used, it does not refer to spring, summer, fall, or winter. Usually, it translates the Hebrew “moed” which merely means a set feast or an appointed time, in reference to the annual festivals (as at Gen 1:14).

Certainly, there appears to be a lack of data stipulating that the festivals have to occur during spring or fall (beyond the fact that the year’s circuit starts on the vernal equinox, dictating that Passover must come on or after the start of the circuit, as discussed previously herein). So while the case can be made that Passover must come in the spring, there seems to be a lack of evidence demanding that Sukkot come in the fall.

“Search the Scriptures”

The “Search the Scriptures” newsletter out of Clarksville, Arkansas has been the primary Sacred Name group promoting this idea of keeping Sukkot totally in the fall season. Its Jul-Aug 2002 issue (p. 1) said that this group would keep Sukkot from Oct 22d to Oct 29th in 2002. Well again, as noted above, this seems awful late in the year to be keeping Sukkot (in view of the preceding discussion).

This source adds that “Almost everybody else is a month too early... This is a result of them following the Rabbi Hillel II calendar, commonly called the Jewish calendar.” True, the calculated Jewish calendar does have some problems (which will be addressed in the following chapter). However, its handling of Sukkot does not seem to be a big question.

The Essene Calendar and Truth

Previous comments focused upon the problem of the calendar followed by the Essenes. At this time, that issue will be revisited in an effort to contrast the Essene beliefs (which has affected a number of believers over the years--even to modern times) with what the Scriptures precisely outline.

The writer of this study has known a number of people over time who have advocated and taught a solar calendar which seems to differ slightly from the Julian-Gregory calendar (some of whom will be cited below in terms of their calendar peculiarities).

The one thing that these persons could never produce was any Scriptural references to authenticate their solar calendars. They always tried to rely on human thinking (rather than the Word) to take them to their solar calendars.

It appears that one of the underlying problems in the thinking of man on this theme occurs when man wants to bring the weekly cycle into some type of an alignment with the years and months (as was just described above with an attempted alignment at the start of the new year). Man would like to have everything uniform and organized so that all the cycles are repetitive and linked together.

Of course, the weekly cycle is utterly independent of the sun and moon cycles and can never be reconciled to them in the present arrangement. The weekly cycle can only be known through experience and never from observation, as is true with the yearly and monthly cycles (this condition will be precisely proven in the succeeding chapters). But there are more complications.

Admittedly, a solar year of roughly, or on average, has 365 1/4 days and a lunar cycle of “about” 29 1/2 days (more correctly, a solar year has some 365.2422+ days and the moon has 29.53059 days per cycle) do present a real problem in attempting to logically understand them in the context of a luni-solar calendar (which results in the need of an intercalcary 13th month, approximately every three years [seven in 19 years] to keep the months in line with the solar year).

Problems With Solar Calendars

But there are similar problems in all solar calendars developed by man. Twelve months of 30 days only gives one 360 days. Four quarters of 91 days each with 13 weeks of seven days each gives one 364 days (which is what the book of Jubilees advocated and which is what the Essenes seem to have used).

With a real solar year of some 365 1/4 days, this 364 day year also has problems, which necessitates some modifications and alterations over time.

Whereas the Jews have used and historically followed a luni-solar calendar for the establishment of the annual feasts, the Essenes and many other people over the years have used solar calendars which cannot be explained or rationalized Scripturally; because, as noted above, there are no Scriptures which support a solar calendar.

A final note on the Essene calendar situation needs mention. While the Essenes apparently used a solar calendar (of perhaps 364 days annually), it is fascinating that they also maintained data on the lunar months and made efforts to reconcile or correlate the two sources for some reason. This reality has been brought out in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

For example, the Scrolls contain a whole series of documents which harmonize the priestly courses at the Temple with both the solar calendar and lunar month data (“The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls,” by Geza Vermes, p. 335-360). One series of documents attempted to correlate moon phases to solar calendar data (ibid, p. 360).

Pete Peters, Revisited

One of the most energetic and successful of the Christian Identity people is Peter Peters of the LaPorte, Colorado Church of Christ (a reported leading pastor in the Identity movement who has been discussed in previous chapters herein). Some of those previous remarks were made on the pride issue and how Peters has invented some very ridiculous theories to impose upon his followers.

Significantly, one of the most gross and pathetic examples of trying to alter and change the calendar into Christian Babylonian confusion and pandemonium has happened with Christian Identity leader Peters.

As described previously, this so-called “pastor” came out in Aviv of 2001 with a special alert for his followers to “observe the five Sacred Days and Live,” as he put it. In his alert, he briefly went into a discussion to try to build a case for an observance of the Passover--apparently, in accordance with a calendar calculation involving just the solar feature of the spring equinox.

As noted in a prior chapter herein, Peters has built his calendar on a solar basis without regard to the moon. He has counted fourteen or fifteen days (this writer is unsure of whether Peters makes his count at fourteen or fifteen days) from around the spring equinox to arrive at his Passover which he designates as a Sabbath day.

Then Peters proceeds on to seemingly designate something near the two solstices (winter and summer) and two equinoxes (spring and fall) also as Sabbath days. All of these calculations are predicated upon the solar calendar without any reference to the moon cycles or conditions.

Not the First With a Solar Calendar

Actually, Peters is not the first person to grab hold of this very unscriptural position and try to promote it as truth--at least, not the first individual to use a solar calendar and try to compute Scriptural festivals with it without regard to moon cycles (although he may be a first in modern times with his designations on the making of the solstices and equinoxes Sabbath days; but then, this is surely something that was in vogue in the ancient past among the more outright sun worshippers).

As pointed out above, the book of Jubilees and the Essene sect at Qumran seem to have followed a solar calendar production over two thousand years ago. Please note that these persons were Jewish people and a part of the framework of Judaism of those days (as Josephus so states).

Anyway, something was profoundly wrong with their calendar theories--as noted elsewhere herein in the vein that YESHUA and the Apostolic Assembly had nothing to do with the Essenes for some obvious reason. The evidence suggests that this Essene break-away sect was not only at odds with traditional Judaism from Ezra’s day (over the calendar); but assuredly, they were at odds with YESHUA and His work.

The evidence is massive that demonic powers have come to various so-called believers over the centuries to build confusion into the calendar question so that people of faith would disrupt their observances of Sabbaths, feasts and festivals in some way to result in sin. As noted earlier, the Sardis motion has been notorious for dreaming up and advocating some ridiculous calendar alteration scheme.

Though Peters of LaPorte is substantially behind multitudes of others (who have tried to mess up the calendar), he has now appeared on the scene to try to put his two cents worth into the equation in order to deceive and mislead the Scripturally shallow and uninformed Christian Identity people.

Attack on Judaism

As justification for his attack upon and rejection of a luni-solar calendar (which is totally Scriptural, as proven in the prior chapters), Peters launches into a tirade and attack upon Judaism and the Jews as if they are responsible for the luni-solar calendar.

Manifestly, Peters is in ignorance and simply doesn’t know what he is talking about. However, a lack of knowledge has not held him back. He has charged ahead full blast and blamed the Jews for the Scriptural luni-solar calendar.

Importantly, in his special alert mailed out to his followers, he even blamed traditional Christianity (which he is a manifest part of) for allowing herself to be Judaized by the Judaizers. He said that the early church did not keep the Jewish feasts, but that she did keep Passover (per I Cor 5:8).

And then, he blamed Judaizers for somehow causing Constantine and the Catholic Council of Nicaea to abandon the Passover for the pagan Easter, which is partially calculated on a lunar-solar basis (it is celebrated on the first Sunday after the first full moon--which comes on or after March 21st, the spring equinox, per Funk & Wagnalls’ “Standard Desk Dictionary,” p. 200).

Of course, these ideas of Peters are too incredible and too stupid to be discussed by intelligent people. But Peters has had a measure of success in the Christian Identity motion with some of his very unscriptural theories. It seems that there are always suckers out there looking for things which are totally ridiculous to even consider.

And that’s the essence of Peters’ work. He is determined to blame the Jews and Judaism for the paganism and calendar deviations present in Christianity.

Classic Confusion

Peter J. Peters seems to have struck a home-run in absolute and total demonic calendar confusion in an undated flyer that he put out in early April 2003 from his “Scriptures for America” (“Scriptures for America” is the Peters’ periodical which he publishes from time to time from his LaPorte, Colorado headquarters).