Postponements and the Day of Passover A.D. 31

Next Part Commonly Asked Questions About the Hebrew Calendar

Back to The Truth About God’s Calendar

If the Holy Days were completely out of alignment—being observed at the wrong time—would Christ have taken note of it? Of course! But no mention was made of this.

The four Gospels are replete with Christ’s condemnation of the Jewish religious establishment. Had they been in error with the calendar, or the concept of postponements, be assured that Christ would have pointed this out. But if they were still in compliance with what He had established with Israel many centuries earlier, then one would expect silence on that subject—and this is exactly the case!

In the year A.D. 31, postponement rules one and two applied in combination, resulting in a two-day postponement of Tishri 1. Had the postponements not been in effect that year, then the Passover would have occurred on a Monday instead of a Wednesday. The fact that Passover occurred on Wednesday, according to the rules of postponements, presents a powerful case that they were in use in the first century and that Christ accepted them. (In the next section, we will see how Passover is counted from Tishri 1.)

Consider one other vitally important point, which further validates the use of postponements! Daniel prophesied, nearly 600 years before Christ’s crucifixion, that the Messiah (Christ) would be “cut off...in the midst of the week” (Dan 9:26-27). Wednesday is literally the middle (midst) of the week. In other words, Daniel accurately foretold that Christ “our Passover” (I Cor. 5:7) would be crucified on a Wednesday Passover—to occur in A.D. 31. Daniel understood that Wednesday would be the correct date for Passover observance that year.

Of course, we have long understood that this verse also means that Christ’s ministry was cut off, after 3 1/2 years, in the middle of a seven-year prophetic week. But, the seven-year prophetic week had to parallel a literal week. Daniel’s prophecy is commonly known as the “seventy weeks” prophecy. Many who once understood have forgotten this important knowledge. They have forgotten that the longest phase of this 490-year prophecy (486 1/2 years) spanned a period having to end in precisely A.D. 31 for the prophecy not to fail!

Consider. If postponement rules one and two had not been in effect, then Christ would not have correctly fulfilled Daniel’s prophecy. Yet, as the God of the Old Testament, it was Christ who had inspired this very prophecy! In light of these facts and His fulfillment, it can be better appreciated why Christ did not condemn the observance of postponements!

Assigning the Dates to the Remaining Six Holy Days

Once the Molad of Tishri—the Feast of Trumpets—has been established for any given year, we can assign dates for all the other Holy Days. The assignment of the three remaining fall Holy Days is forthright and simple. Since Atonement is on the 10th of Tishri, and the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles is on the 15th of Tishri, and the Last Great Day is on the 22nd of Tishri, no extensive calculation is needed for these assignments. Also, note that the 1st, 15th and 22nd of Tishri will always fall on the same day of the week.

Passover is determined by counting backward from the Feast of Trumpets that follows it. This is the logical method because every sacred year is centered on the Feast of Trumpets that occurs within that same sacred year. There is consistently a 164-day period between Passover (Nisan 14) and the Feast of Trumpets. None of the months between Nisan and Tishri are ever adjusted or varied. Therefore, the inclusive time is consistent. The first day of Unleavened Bread, on the 15th of Nisan, occurs one day after Passover. The last day of Unleavened Bread occurs on the 21st of Nisan. The assignment of these spring Holy Days are clear, much as the fall Holy Days that occur shortly after Trumpets.

The only remaining Holy day left to assign is Pentecost. This day is pinpointed by counting 50 days from the day after the weekly Sabbath that falls during the Days of Unleavened Bread. On this day, the wave sheaf offering was presented and the count began, inclusive of that specific day. Here the count began on the first day of the week and ended on the first day of the week. Some critics insist that the count proceeded from the day after the first Holy Day. If this were the case, a count would not be necessary. The time would be set as consistently 50 days beyond the first day of Unleavened Bread. But this is not the case and a count is necessary from the time of the wave sheaf offering on the day after the weekly Sabbath that falls during the time of Unleavened Bread as discussed above.

Notice that Pentecost always falls on a Sunday—the beginning of the week. This is to be expected because this Holy Day, among other things, marks the occasion of the beginning of the Church of God.

Clarifying Confusing Issues

Some may wonder how the Holy Days can be postponed two days and still be in sequence with the new moon and with the full moon occurring on the Feast of Tabernacles and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which fall on the 15th of the sacred months. Since the calculated Tishri 1 occurs at the conjunction of the moon, the crescent of the new moon is not even visible until about a day later. The amount of days postponed can be 0, 1 or 2 days, averaging about 1 day, which is the usual time the moon appears after conjunction. It is seen that, even with the two-day postponement, these Holy Days, that are supposed to occur on the full moon, still occur on the full moon. There is almost a three-day period of time in which the moon is full. This does not mean that any of the three days would suffice for observance of a feast. Only the days that are counted from Tishri 1, and adjusted by the legitimate postponements as set by God’s calendar, represent the time set aside by God as His Holy Days.

You will note that in all four rules of postponement, the Molad of Tishri advances forward, but never backward. When compensation is called for in the postponement rules, the Molad of Tishri advances forward, compensating for this relative time drift. The time of advancement of the Molad of Tishri always closely approximates the cumulative drift within a few hours in any given year. Of course, by each 19-year time cycle the balance is precisely on schedule. Instead of the postponements pushing the Holy Days off schedule, as some charge, they compensate for drift that would otherwise take them off schedule in the opposite direction. Amazingly, this is done while at the same time insuring that the Holy Days fall at the permissible time without being in conflict with the weekly Sabbath.

Others often ask whether observation (of the new moon) or calculation of this time is the official method of setting the time recognized by the Hebrew calendar. At this present time, the Hebrew calendar is primarily based upon calculation, in which the Molad of Tishri is derived, based upon the accuracy of astronomical science which existed well before the time of Christ. Observation of the new moon is now considered a secondary means of confirming existing calculations. Observation could hardly be counted upon as the sole means of arriving at the precise time of the new moon due to clouds which can obstruct the view.

Observation was considered the official means of establishing the Molad of Tishri, during the time that the Sanhedrin was functioning—from the time of Ezra until the fourth century A.D., according to The Comprehensive Hebrew Calendar. However, when visibility was impaired, calculation was called upon to interpolate, as well as for confirmation of what was observed. So, essentially, both calculation and observation have been employed—setting a useful system of checks and balances to insure ongoing accuracy.

Since the visible new moon of Judea had been the standard through the centuries, it is from this vantage point that official observations were made. Keep in mind that at different longitudes, the new moon will be viewed at significantly different times than as viewed from the area of Judea. Also, as one travels the different latitudes, from north to south, the exact viewing of the new moon will differ.

Observation of signs of the arrival of spring by the Sanhedrim also was used to establish that the 13th month of the leap year was correct with the season. After the Romans forced the Sanhedrin to dissolve, the calculated pattern of leap years proved to continue this accuracy with respect to the seasons. It is believed that such adjustments as the pattern of leap years were anticipated well in advance and were implemented to compensate for adjustments needed for long-term accuracy. The most recent adjustment of this nature had occurred in about the year A.D. 142 at the time of the patriarch Simon III (Jewish Encyclopedia, 1907, vol. 3. p.500, as cited in The Hebrew Calendar: A Mathematical Introduction). At that time the pattern of leap years that had previously fallen in the pattern of 2, 5, 7, 10, 13, 16, 18 of the 19-year cycle shifted forward by 1 year in the pattern of 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, 19. This adjustment served to keep the calendar in harmony with the seasons for many centuries in advance—up to the present time.

Some have asked whether the orbits of the moon and earth will return to a condition of perfect harmony in which a 30-days month will mesh with a 360-day year after the Return of Christ. Although we cannot answer such an issue with certainty, the Scriptures speak of the times of “restitution of all things” (Acts 3:21). If the perfect 30-day month and 360-day year did exist at the time of creation, then we should expect this to be restored as it was in the beginning.

Next Part Commonly Asked Questions About the Hebrew Calendar

Back to The Truth About God’s Calendar

Back to By David C. Pack