The Calendar, Part 11

Today I want to continue our Bible study series on the calendar. I'd like to finish it before the next two, three years go by. I'm not going to wind up in another couple three Bible studies at the very most, but last time—and I'm not going to go back and go over it again— but last time has been actually over two months now.

Back on December 14th here in Bellevue, I gave part 10. And just briefly, I just covered trumpets, possible origins, and history of the Hebrew calendar, which I've mentioned there is a calculated calendar based on first calculating what's called the mola'ad of Tishri, or the new moon of Tishri, which is the day of trumpets, as we know. And of course, all the other—when you use the Hebrew count— all the other feasts and holy days are then determined from that particular point, after you determine when the day of trumpets is. So last time I also showed that the importance of that, I showed the importance of that spiritually speaking, using the day of trumpets as a reference point for the calendar.

Since the return of Christ is portrayed by the day of trumpets, as is the key pivotal event that's going to be witnessed by the entire world at the time Christ returns, and which is going to forever change the world in the course of history of the world, when that event takes place. We're all looking forward to. Now, since the mola'ad of Tishri or new moon of trumpets is calculated, it can then, of course, be calculated in advance for any given year in the future, making it possible to make plans far in advance for the holy, fall holy days and for the feasts and tabernacles, which obviously would not be the case if you just went strictly by observation.

So the Hebrew calendar we use today also incorporates four post-pulment rules, which for some are very controversial. Should they be used? Where and when and where do they originate? And do they really serve a purpose other than just of convenience? So today, in Part 11 of the series, we will take a brief look at the post-pulment rules and look more deeply into when they may have originated, which is somewhat even showered in mystery a little bit itself.

We'll also review the history of our present-day Gagorian calendar just a little bit, which is very interesting because we'll see how it also links to the present-day Hebrew calendar that we use. So the title of this particular Bible study is the calendar Part 11, Post-Pulment Rules and Additional History. But I want to ask this question first because this question has been brought up in a legitimate question.

Should we call it the Hebrew calendar or should we call it the Jewish calendar? And what difference does it make? Or does it make a difference? I mean, we're using the same calendar that the Orthodox Jews around the world use except for we count the Pentecost differently than they do.

So that's the one thing that's a little bit different. Well, and that we use the same same calendar they use, the same Hebrew calendar they use. But should it be called the Hebrew calendar or the Jewish calendar? Does it make a difference? What's the difference? I just want to cover that real briefly here because it's an important question. There is a distinction there, and I want to mention why we use Hebrew, but it certainly could call the Jewish calendar. But the reason there's a distinction there is because the name Hebrew first appears back in Genesis 14, verse 13, if you look it up, where a Brahm who became Abraham, where Brahm is called the Hebrew.

He's called the Hebrew. And all scholars agree that the word Hebrew is derived from Eber, E-B-E-R, the great grandson of Shem or the great great grandson of Noah. In fact, Genesis 10.21 says, children will be born also to Shem, the father of all the children of Eber, father being, in this case, the great grandfather. So the Hebrews, the word Hebrew in the Hebrews then can be traced back all the way back to before Abraham.

So then calling this calendar the Hebrew calendar then could insinuate to some that that counter can also be traced back to Abraham and before. And that's controversial, whether it can or not. Some would say it could, and some say no. See, some would also say that the present calendar we are using has gone through many, many revisions through the centuries. And that the current calendar we are now using with post-ponement rules can only be traced back to about the 4th century A.D.

or C.E., if you want to use that terminology, to about 358 or 359. I'll use A.D. because I'm more familiar with that term. To about 358 or 359 A.D. to Rabbi Hillel II. So some would say then to call it the Jewish calendar would be more accurate than calling it the Hebrew calendar, as United does and as I'm doing in this series of Bible studies.

However, as I said last time, no one really knows for sure the exact time in which the current Hebrew or Jewish calendar with its 4 post-ponement rules originated, as I will show you in the Bible study today. It's hard to know for sure. There's a little bit of mystery surrounding us, I'll show you. But I don't have any problems. We want to call it the Hillel II calendar, because a lot of people look at that for where it originated, although you can't really say for sure if it originated there or before.

But that's fine if you want to call it that, because this calendar we're using is going to call it the Hillel II calendar, whatever you want to call it. It's a very, very accurate calendar for observing and calculating and using the Holy Days. I want to talk a little bit now about the post-ponement rules.

What about these so-called, and I'm talking about the 4 post-ponement rules that are associated with the present Hebrew calendar that we use and that Jews around the world use. First, 3 questions I want to ask regarding the post-ponement rules. Number 1, are they really necessary? Well, absolutely they are necessary. That is, post-ponement rules of some sort are necessary. Because any and all calendars must incorporate some form of post-ponement rules in order to keep any annual observances in sync with their proper season.

I covered that in detail in the previous Bible studies, so I'm not going to go through that again. Those post-ponement rules, whatever you want to make them, whatever they might be, have to be devised by man to some extent. As the Bible does not give us enough details or instructions by which we can construct a calendar strictly from the Bible alone, going no other information at all. There's just not enough detailed information there to develop rules for calendars strictly from the Bible alone, which I also covered in the previous Bible study.

But here's a big question when it comes to the 4 post-ponement rules used in our present-day Hebrew calendar. This is the big question. Do they predate Rabbi Hillel II? That's the question a lot of people would ask. Many would say no, and there are some that would say yes. But the really only correct answer that I can come up with that I could say I could give is no one knows for sure. Because some scholars, even if calendar scholars will say no, and some calendar scholars will say yes, as I'll show you. Now, Rabbi Hillel II's actual name was Rabbi Hillel Ben Yehuda, the son of Yehuda, Y-E-H-U-D-A-H.

He was a Jewish rabbi and a calendar committee member of the Sanhedrin back in the 4th century AD. And again, I say many claimed that he originated the 4 post-ponement rules of the Hebrew calendar back then at that time in 358 or 359 AD. Both dates were given when you go into the Internet on that. But there are other historians who feel that the post-ponement rules predated Hillel II maybe by many centuries, as I'll also show you today. So it's controversial. Now, the Sanhedrin, it's interesting to look at that just to briefly tell you what it was.

The Sanhedrin was the highest Jewish court in the 1st century AD. And actually, it's been referred to in the New Testament. You won't find the word Sanhedrin in the New Testament, but it's probably what was referred to in the New Testament as the Consul. So you look up the Consul in the New Testament, that's probably referring to the Sanhedrin. You'll see that, for example, in Acts 5, verse 34. It talks about the Consul, which also mentioned again in Acts 23, verse 1. There, where it says the Consul, that's probably referring to the Sanhedrin. In the 1st century AD, it was presided over by the high priest.

It was made up of both Sadducees and Pharisees, although most feel that probably Sadducees more dominated to Sanhedrin. There are probably more Sadducees on it than Pharisees. And the high priest was probably a Sadducee, because Sadducees were the priestly parties, so a high priest was undoubtedly a Sadducee. Within the Sanhedrin, there was a calendar committee. And of like three members, some will say, some historians will say three to seven members.

But at least three members, for determining the calendar in the Holy Days. This committee within the Sanhedrin determined the molotov tissue of the calendars for the Jews to be used to meet for the Ephesan Holy Days. And the calendar committee within the Sanhedrin was called the Beth Din, B-E-T-H-D-I-N. It's spelled with three letters in Hebrew, Beth, Dalit, Nun.

As I've gone through before in some other studies, as I brought it forth here, the letter Bet, the second letter, the Hebrew alphabet, is also the Hebrew word for house.

And in ancient Hebrew, the letter Bet was drawn to picture a house or a tent.

Now, the letters Dalit, Nun, spell either Dan or Din, depending on the accent.

In those words, Dan or Din spelled the Hebrew word. Dan spells the Hebrew word for judge, and Din spells the Hebrew word for judgment. Both spelled Dalit, Nun. Thus, the Beth Din within the Sanhedrin was called the house of judgment. So Beth Din was the house of judgment within the Sanhedrin. And this committee of, say, three to seven members made the judgment for determining the mole added to the t-shirt and then declared, based on that judgment, when God's feasts and holy days would occur in any given year.

But here's the interesting point about this calendar committee within the Sanhedrin.

This calendar committee, or Beth Din, they met in secret, and they never divulged the rules or methods that they used for calculating the calendar. And this went on for at least three centuries or more, from the time of Christ, up until the time of Hillel II, who in 358, I'll use that here, 358-359, but I'll say 358, who in 358 AD was the leader of the calendar committee within the Sanhedrin. At that time, severe persecution from the Roman Empire threatened the very existence of the Sanhedrin. So I'm not going to quote from two sources that explain just very briefly what occurred. The first source is a brief quote from the Jewish Encyclopedia, it's online jews encyclopedias.com, article Calendar History of.

It says, the persecutions under Constantius finally decided the patriarch Hillel II sent to publish rules for the computation of the calendar, which had hitherto been regarded as a secret science. Now, the Jewish historian Arthur Speer, spelled S-P-I-E-R, in his work entitled Comprehensive Jewish Calendar, adds this clarification as to what happened, so I'm quoting now from Arthur Speer, when oppression and persecution threatened the continued existence of the Sanhedrin, the patriarch Hillel II took an extraordinary step to preserve the unity of Israel.

In order to prevent the Jews scattered all over the surface of the earth from celebrating their new moons, festivals, and holidays at different times, he made public the system of calendar calculation, which up to that time had been a closely guarded secret. Now, since what he made public included the four postponement rules, it would be safe to assume that those rules were part of the calendar calculation that up to that time had been a closely guarded secret, and which had hitherto been regarded as a secret science according to the Jewish Encyclopedia. Thus, the very real possibility exists, according to these Jewish authorities, that Hillel II, rather than devising and originating the postponement rules, instead made them public for the first time. That's a possibility, a very real possibility, to make sure they would be preserved, because there's a possibility the Sanhedrin was going to be dissolved. In fact, not too long after that, the Sanhedrin was dissolved. Not too long after that.

So, also, as I showed last time, the Hebrew calendar with these four postponement rules is the only verifiable calendar, and I gave a Bible study on this, and I think it was last time, time before, it's the only verifiable counter that coincides with what we are given in the book of John. That could substantiate a Saturday to Saturday feast of tabernacle, it was an eighth day, it was preceded, or excuse me, it was followed, not preceded, but the feast of tabernacle on the eighth day, it was in one year, went from Saturday to Saturday, it was followed in the next year using that same calendar by a Passover that fell on a Wednesday, which, you know, has to fit with what the Bible gives us, especially in the book of John. And that works for two years, according to the Hebrew calendar we use with its postponement rules. It works for having a Saturday to Saturday feast in 30 AD, followed by a Wednesday Passover in 31 AD. It fits that particular scenario.

Now, the interesting thing about that is that the Passover, as I pointed out in my Bible study while back, the Passover in 31 AD only falls on a Wednesday using postponement rules.

In 30 AD it occurs on a Wednesday either way, but in 31 it has to be postponement rules.

Now, I'll just add this as well as I did in, I think, one of the previous Bible studies. Could there be some form of a new moon calendar that would give the same result?

Well, yes, there could. Sure. But I haven't seen any way to really verify that there was one that they were using then that would have that same result. So it's difficult to verify whether some other calendar would do that, although it's a possibility.

I want to then address this one more question here regarding these postponement rules.

What is their purpose? What is the purpose of these four postponement rules?

Well, first I want to talk about it. I think all of you are aware it's very interesting. The Hebrew calendar operates on a 19-year time cycle, as I think a lot of you are aware of.

Seven of those 19 years, and I didn't write down the sequence, so in the arbids there's a certain sequence they use, a certain number of years, but seven of those 19 years have a 13 month added at the end of the year, thus postponing the beginning of the next year by one month.

And each month has either 29 or 30 days. This 19-year time cycle is a very important This 19-year time cycle, a postponing the beginning of the year by one month, seven times every 19 years, keeps the seasons from drifting and always keeps them in alignment.

That is, it keeps the feast and holy days in proper alignment with their seasons and ensures that they never drift. Now, I'm not going to go over these additional four postponement rules in detail, but I'll simply give you their purpose. Basically, they further refine the calendar to lock the festivals into their proper seasons. In fact, if you want copies of the postponement rules, I'm probably not too interested. They're kind of confusing, but I did make about 24 copies of them. I put on a table out in the foyer, so if you want to see what they actually are in writing, you can pick them up. There are many copies of them for you. But rule one simply states, if the molar of t-shirt occurs at or after noon, calculated, the first day of t-shirt must be postponed to the next day.

So this prevents the day of toughest from being observed on a day when the new moon occurs, when the day is already well over half over, and you wouldn't see that new moon until the next night anyway. Now, rules three and four, I'm not going to go over them, but they simply regulate the maximum minimum number of days you can have in any given year.

Rule two is the one that's most controversial, and I'm just going to kind of go over this slowly.

Rule two forbids the first of t-shirt or the day of trumpets from falling on a Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday. Now, some people say, well, we shouldn't use that because that's just convenience. Well, I'm going to bring you some information that maybe goes a little bit further than that. Let's just go over it, though, and just see what situation you would have if the day of trumpets fell on a Sunday. Now, as you know, whatever the day of trumpets is, the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles will occur on that same day of the week.

But if trumpets fell on a Sunday, then the Feast of Tabernacles, the eighth day, would go from Sunday to Sunday, with the first and last Holy Days then being a double Sabbath.

So if that was the case, and the Feast of Tabernacles started on a Sunday, since the day before is a Sabbath, you would have to arrive at that feast on Friday and get yourself set up. And you couldn't leave until Monday, until after it ended. So you'd have to basically then, you'd have to be there to observe the Feast of Tabernacles, an eighth day for nine days, instead of eight days, because you'd have to add a Sabbath onto it.

God said to do it for seven days a feast and one extra day, eight days, but you'd have to go for nine days if that were the case. What about if trumpets fell on a Friday? Well, if it fell on a Friday, then the Feast of Tabernacles, an eighth day, would go from Friday to Friday. And there'll be three double Sabbaths with no preparation date for those weekly Sabbaths. And again, the Feast of Tabernacles, an eighth day, would have to be observed for nine days, instead of eight days, basically. Now also, if the day of trumpets fell on a Friday, the day of atonement would fall on a Sunday, and there would be no preparation date for the day of atonement, because the day before would be a Sabbath. So that might create some problems. But is that just convenience again, or not? Well, you can decide. What about Wednesday? What if it fell on a Friday? What if it fell on a Wednesday? If trumpets fell on a Wednesday, atonement would occur on a Friday, again eliminating the preparation day for the weekly Sabbath. So this post-ponement rule minimizes the number of double Sabbaths you can have in any given year. Of course, as we know, occasionally you will have a double Sabbath during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. But this eliminates lots of double Sabbaths in the fall that might occur otherwise.

So it also shows that it's important to have a preparation day for the Sabbath. That's what it seems to indicate. That's what it does. And it's interesting when you look at Scripture, since this rule too prevents you from eliminating the preparation day for the Sabbath, it's interesting to look at Scripture to see that Scripture does say that that is important. It's important to have a preparation day for the Sabbath. So there is some biblical support for this rule, in essence. Let's look at that. Let's look at two examples of that. One is in Luke 23.

We're all familiar with this because this is, the context here is after Christ's death, and he's in the grave there, and they're going to prepare spices for him.

Women are coming to the tomb. But Exodus 23, in verse 56, then they returned to prepared spices and fragrant oils, and then they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandments. So obviously when they prepared these spices, it was the day before the weekly Sabbath. Chapter 24, I mean, verse 1. Now on the first day of the week then, very early in the morning, they and certain other women with them came to the tomb, bringing the spices which they had prepared. What they had prepared on Friday, on the day before the weekly Sabbath, on the preparation day, because the day before the Sabbath was a preparation day. So this kind of supports that that's important to have a preparation day for the Sabbath. There's another example that's even more stronger example than that, and that's back in Exodus 16. A lot of you are very familiar with this. Of course, the context of Exodus 16 is God is now leading Israel out of Egypt. He's leading them out of Sinai to give them the Ten Commandments, and as he's leading them out of slavery, out of bondage from Egypt, he's feeding them with men. And of course, as you know, he's given a certain portion every day. But notice what it says in Exodus 16 verse 5.

It shall be on the sixth day, on the preparation day for the Sabbath, on the sixth day of the week, that they shall prepare what they shall bring in, and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily. So as you know the story there, God sent a certain amount of manna down each day, and they went out and gathered it. Then he left over at Stink. On Friday, he gave them twice as much, so he wouldn't have to go out and pick it up on the Sabbath. And twice as much as he gathered on that Friday, when it was left over, it did not stink. It lasted, unlike the other days. So again, it emphasizes here, it shows how important it is to have a preparation day for the Sabbath. And rule number two of the post-fumment rules guarantees there's going to be a preparation day for the Sabbath in most cases. So it kind of supports that biblical concept of having a preparation day for the Sabbath.

Because without post-fumment rule number two, you know, either the day of atonement at times of the fall on a Friday, eliminating the preparation day for the weekly Sabbath, and also there'd be a lot more double Sabbath. So rule number two was not just for convenience. It actually ensures that there's going to be a preparation day for the weekly Sabbath. Because without post-fumment rule number two, we would have three double Sabbaths within a three-week period in the fall, almost 40% of the time.

Traumas in the first and last days of the Evelyn bread would all become double Sabbaths, a large portion of the time, nearly 40% of the time. Post-fumment rule number two prevents that from happening. So I'd have to say it's more than just convenience. There's the purpose in it.

However, this does raise a very, very interesting question that may come to some of your minds.

I find this a fascinating question to ask.

Why then, if we're counting to Pentecost correctly, and maybe someone questioned this after what I just said, but why then did God purposely have us count to Pentecost in a way that creates a double Sabbath every year at Pentecost, if we're counting correctly, and Pentecost should fall on a Sunday rather than on the sixth of Stephen as the Orthodox Jews count? That's a very, very interesting question.

Because if you wave out to Pentecost, you always eliminate a preparation date for Pentecost, because Pentecost is always on a Sunday, at least the way we count. While I will show in my final Bible study in this series, there is an important spiritual lesson that we can learn from counting to Pentecost as we do, and united, as most of the other churches of God do. Now, there's one more major purpose that I want to give you for these four post-modern rules that I find very, very fascinating. These four post-modern rules ensure something. They ensure that the full moon on the opening night of the Feast of Tabernacles and the full moon at the beginning night of the days of Unleavened Bread are always going to be at their maximum fullness. I just find this very, very interesting. Let's again notice, and I covered this, I think I covered this verse in the previous Bible, so let's notice again in Psalm 81. And I'm reading from the New King James, and New King James has the Old King James corrected. The translation is not correct in the Old King James, it is corrected in the New King James. But Psalm 81.3, so what I'm reading from the New King James is the correct rendering. Psalm 81 verse 3, it says, blow the trumpet at the time of the new moon. And of course, the day of trumpets occurs on a new moon. At the full moon on our psalm, feast day.

And that again is the correct translation. Trumpets falls on the time of the new moon, and the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles falls at the full moon on our solemn feast day. On our solemn feast day, the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles, which is a solemn feast day, is always a full moon. So the Feast of Tabernacles then, if you want to be aligned with this particular scripture here, is to begin at the time of the full moon. And it's interesting that these four psalm rules guarantee the full moon on the opening night of the Feast of Tabernacles will be at its maximum fullness on that particular night. Now, you can calculate the full moon for the opening night of the Feast of Tabernacles for any given years when psalm rules postpone the day of trumpets by one or two days. In some years, there's no postponement. Some years, trumpets can be postponed by either one or two days. Now, here's the thing that's fascinating. In every single instance, the moon is going to be fuller on that night than it would have been if the day of trumpets had not been postponed. In a year when you use postponement rules, and trumpets is postponed by one or two days, you get the opening night of the Feast of Tabernacles. The moon is going to be fuller than it would have been if trumpets had not been postponed and been observed a day or two earlier.

Now, I have an appendix that I printed out. I've got copies of this on the information that we want to pick it up, but it goes through that. A 19-year comparison showing how the postponement rules of the Hebrew calendar bring us nearer to the festival full moons as indicated by Psalm 81 verses 2 to 4. They give years. They're all from 1980 to the year 2000. They give the Hebrew calendar what the percentage of fullness is on that night, and they go without postponements. There's nine years there were there were no postponements during that period of time from 82 to 2000, and then there were other years where there were, and they show what it would have been without postponements and what it was with postponements, and every single one of those years when trumpets were postponed, the full moon was fuller when you postponed trumpets than it would have been had you not postponed trumpets, which is just very, very interesting. Now, I would have to ask this. How did the sages know that would be the case? I don't know.

But I do know what the next two verses say here, which is also interesting. Psalm 81 verses 4 and 5. It says, this is the statute for Israel. It's a law for the God of Jacob. This he established when?

In Joseph as a testimony when he went throughout the land of Egypt. When I heard a language I did not understand. So I just find all that very, very fascinating. Now, one final brief point regarding the 19-year time cycle Hebrew calendar. That's one I mentioned to you. They have found records of other civilizations using a similar, not the same, but a similar 19-year time cycle calendar that's similar to the Hebrew calendar. Going all the way back, they found this in clay tablets, going all the way back to the ancient Sumerians, which is the most ancient civilization that we really have records of and know of. It's going farther back than the Egyptians even.

So the question is, did the Hebrews get their calendar from the Sumerians, or did the Sumerians derive their calendar from the Hebrews? You decide.

I want to end our discussion of post-pom rules there and go on to take a look at how our Gregorian calendar links to our present-day Hebrew calendar, because it's also fascinating to understand that. Our Gregorian calendar has a very interesting history. Again, which directly links to the Hebrew calendar, although many probably don't realize that. The calendar of ancient Rome was essentially a lunar calendar of 12 months, with a 13th intercalorie month added occasionally to make more or less keep the seasons in line, to keep the months in step with the seasons.

It's interesting that we still use the names of those months of the ancient Roman calendar, with the exception of. The only two names that they use in the old Roman calendar we don't use today is Quintilis, which was the fifth month of the Roman calendar. That was changed to July.

And Sextilis, which was the sixth month of the ancient Roman calendar, which was changed to August.

July, of course, was renamed after Julius Caesar, and August was renamed after Augustus Caesar. September, October, November, December, the names of which indicate the numbers 7, 8, 9, and 10, were the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth months of the Roman calendar.

We've retained those names, even though now for us they have the ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth months of our Gregorian calendar. Back in 46 BC, the Roman calendar was in a state of confusion.

It didn't have any specific rules to really keep the lunar months in sync with the seasons, as does the Hebrew calendar. So Julius Caesar hired some Egyptian astronomers who recommended that Rome adopt a strictly solar calendar, as they used in Egypt.

They also told Julius Caesar that the solar calendar had exactly 365 and a quarter days.

Thus, they recommended adding one additional day every fourth year to the Roman month, Februaryus, which today we call February. Now, that ancient calendar was so out of sync when they, by the time they had these astronomers look into it, the ancient Roman calendar was so out of sync with the seasons that at the end of 46 BC, Julius Caesar had to add three additional months to get it back in sync. He added 90 additional days in order to get the seasons back in sync, or to get the calendar in sync with the seasons, where their observances, they had their pagan observances. So in 46 to 45 BC, that became known as the year of confusion, because that 90 days it had to be added. The calendar adopted by Rome in 46 BC then became known as the Julian calendar, named after Julius Caesar. And again, it was strictly a solar calendar with an extra day added at the end of February every fourth year.

That seemed to work fine until the time of Pope Gregory the 13th, because he noticed in 1582 AD, 1600 years later, that Easter was drifting. He was drifting further and further back towards winter on the Julian calendar. Now here's a really interesting question.

How did he come down to understand?

Let me quote from an article entitled, History of the Gugorian Calendar.

The Gugorian calendar resulted from a perceived need to reform the method of calculating dates of Easter. Under the Julian calendar, the dating of Easter had been standardized using March 21st as the date of the equinox. But then Pope Gregory found that Easter was drifting from a springtime position and was losing its relation with the Jewish Passover. Passover wasn't drifting, but Easter was. By the 16th century, the equinox had shifted 10 days, so Pope Gregory convened a commission to consider reform of the calendar. So how did the drifting of Easter become apparent?

Again, Easter was drifting towards winter. Well, the Passover was not drifting.

Now the reason Easter was drifting is because there are not precisely 365 and a quarter days in a year. A solar year is about 12 minutes shorter than that. Now you say, well, 12 minutes, that's not much. But you just, it was extra 12 minutes shorter. It meant that every 128 years, Easter would drift one day back towards winter. But the Heber counter didn't drift at all because the post-formal rules didn't allow it to drift.

So Pope Gregory and his astronomers then changed the post-formal rules for their Julian calendar.

They removed adding an extra day in February for century-leaf years that are not divisible by 400.

It's kind of complicated, but it's interesting. In other words, the century years of 1700, 1800, and 1900, they're not leap years because they're not divisible by 400. The same will be true in the upcoming years of 2100, 2200, and 2300. There will be no leap years in February for those years because they're not divisible by 400. But the century years, versus 1582, when he revised this, the century year of 1600, and of course in the year 2000, it had a February 29th, and also 2400 will have to be a leap year as well. They'll have an extra day added in February because they are not, because, excuse me, they are evenly divided by 400. So any century years divided by 400, February is going to have an extra day added. If it's not, if it's a century year and it's not divisible 400, it will not have an extra day added in February. That's how they modified it to keep it more in line so it wouldn't drift by one day every 20-28 years. So the secular calendar we use today then is now called the Gregorian calendar, named after Pope Gregory XIII. But to get Easter in sync with the seasons, as the Passover was, 10 days were dropped from the calendar in 1582. They dropped 10 days. But the sequence of the days a week was not changed. Saturday was still the seventh day of the week. Sunday was still the first day of the week. As documented in our old Worldwide Church of God book, it has time then lost. You can actually go online and get this printed out.

But it would be another 170 years before England and America finally adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752. By then they had to drop 11 days from the calendar. But if you go to the start, you can go online, Herbert W. Armstrong or whatever, and you'll find a site that has all his archives. There's the old book that Mr. Herbert Armstrong wrote, a long time ago, has time then lost, which addresses this very issue. Go through all this. Plus a couple other things on there. Josh's long day, and hezakai went back 10 degrees and all that. But anyway, all that's documented here in this book has time then lost. I want to quote a little bit from that booklet, has time then lost.

In the Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 3, page 740, the article chronology we read is to be noted that the Christian period, in the Christian period, the order of days in the week has never been interrupted. Thus, when Gregory XIII performed the calendar in 1582, Thursday, the 4th of October, was followed by Friday, the 15th of October. That's how they dropped the 10 days.

Then they reproduced the calendar there, the actual calendar in their booklet.

You will notice how 10 days were dropped out. One day was the 4th, and the very next day was the 15th of October. But the 4th was Thursday, and the next day was Friday. The British countries refused to change the calendar when the Pope ordered it. So they continued with the old Julian calendar until 1752. And while their days of the month were different, yet their days of the week were just the same as in Rome. Those who kept the Sabbath in England also kept the Sabbath in Rome. Those who observed Sunday observed the same day both in Rome, where the calendar had been changed, and in London where it had not. The English countries changed their calendar in 1752, and by that time was necessary to drop out 11 days. The change was made in September as follows. In 1752, Wednesday, September 2nd, was followed by Thursday, September 14th. In Russia, not everybody did this even then. In Russia, they didn't change to a Gregorian calendar until 1907. And by then they had to drop 13 days out. In fact, if you go online, it appears that the last country to actually adopt the Gregorian calendar was Turkey in 1927, when they also had to drop 13 days. So now we've got the whole world online with the same calendar, but it took a long time to do that. In the article saying, so we see that the calendar that has been in effect since 45 BC prior to the birth of Christ proves that there has never been any change in the weekly cycle from the time of Christ until now. The Saturday of today is the same seventh day of the week as it was in Christ's time. We can therefore be sure we keep the same Saturday that Christ kept. Again, that's when the booklet has time then lost.

Which all that I find very, very fascinating study. But the interesting point in all this additional history is that the Hebrew calendar with its intercalary months and four post-boma rules was not drifting, but the Julian calendar was. Now to show how amazingly accurate the present-day Hebrew calendar is, I'd like to read one more quote before closing. This is a quote from a book titled, The Essence of the Holy Days, Insight from the Jewish Sages, by Abraham, A-V-R-A-H-A-M, Yaakov, Y-A-A-K-O-V, Finkel, F-I-N-K-E-L, published in I think 1993, Essence of the Holy Days.

Considering that the Julian calendar was 10 days off when the Groyan calendar was adopted in 1582, it could seem amazing how accurate the ancient Hebrews were with their calendar.

The calculation of the calendar was transmitted to the sages in this court in this author. Some would disagree, others agree. That's what I'm saying. It's hard to say when those rules were adopted, no, so on. The calculation of the Hebrew calendar was transmitted to the sages in an unbroken chain going back to Moses according to this particular Jewish author. According to the ancient civilizations, the exact time between one new moon and the next, and I'll qualify this in a moment, is 29 days, 12 hours, and 793 chalicams, c-h-a-l-e-k-i-m, are parts of an hour because the hour is divided in there into 1,080 parts. In other words, one lunar month is 29.53059 days. Now, but I want to qualify.

That's an average over a period of time. In other words, you average new moons, one new moon to the next over a long period of time, you're going to get an exact number for the average. And then, if you calculate it for that same period of time, another time, 20 years, whatever it might be, you're going to get exact average. So these are exact averages. It doesn't mean that one month of moon is that precise time because actually a new moon to new moon in any given month can vary by two hours, but it's the average that's exact over a long period of time.

It's interesting to note, he goes on saying, that according to NASA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the time between one new moon and the next, if you calculate over a period of time and average it out, is 29.530588 days instead of 059 days. Of course, NASA has at its disposal the most advanced sophisticated telescopes and computers to calculate that average. Nevertheless, the difference between NASA's figures and that of Hillel II, the figures from the Hebrew calendar that he became known, that he revealed, which originated, according to this author, more than 3,000 years ago, is like two millions of a day is the difference. Very, very hard. Any difference at all. And again, that's a calculated average over a period of time. But it shows that even when you use all the modern technology, computers, and everything else, you calculate this average, it's almost identical with that of the Hebrew calendar using post-pulmer rules. Part of any difference whatsoever.

So the post-pulmer rules of the Hebrew calendar are amazingly accurate, to within two minutes of a day over a period of, uh, uh, has been done as an average over a period of time, according to Abraham Finkel. So that then is some additional history regarding the accuracy of the present-day Hebrew calendar with the support pulse rules. Extremely accurate in, in, as a, as a means by which we can keep our Holy Days in sync with the seasons for observing them.

Now I want to end here for now, but we still have about four more overall calendar issues to cover, which will probably take maybe three more Bible studies. Next time I'm going to look at, this is a very interesting subject to look at, which I think is one you have to look at if you're going to cover the calendar. Look at why there are no calendar conflicts mentioned in the Bible.

Now, at least three various Hebrew calendars were being used by the various Jewish groups at the time of Christ. And what I mean by that is it means accounting to Pentecost. We're using the same Hebrew calendar, but they had different means of accounting to Pentecost. The Pharisees counted one way, the Sadducees counted another way, and there's evidence that they're seen counting to get a third way. So all those groups then would have calculated Pentecost to be on a different day. They would observe Pentecost on a different day. And yet, Acts 2 verse 1 says, when the day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. Now, if you had three Jewish groups counting to Pentecost in three different ways, and then they would have deserted it three different times, how could they have all been in one accord in one place, as Acts 2.1 tells us? Why? And why are there no apparent calendar conflicts in the Bible, especially in the New Testament regards to counting to Pentecost? That's a fascinating question to ask. We'll look at that next time. And there are three additional areas we need to cover.

One is, what is the distinction between the weekly Sabbath and the annual Holy Day Sabbath? Is there a distinction? If so, what is the distinction?

This I've also covered. I want to cover it again, though. Is there a prophetic warning in the Bible regarding end-time events which could affect the calendar? Again, I touched on that in a previous Bible study some time ago, but I want to again, touch on it again before we conclude, just briefly.

And then three, I want to cover, and this is very important just to give you both sides of the story, because again, it's controversial. But I want to cover counting to Pentecost and why we count to Pentecost as we do. Again, which is contrary to the way Orthodox Jews around the world count to Pentecost. As you know, they observe it on a fixed day of the month, as we observe it on a fixed day of the week. So we'll pick it up from here next time by looking at why there are no calendar conflicts or issues mentioned or even hinted at anywhere in the Bible.