Toto

breaking news

Link2

Interesting theory, but what is it based on?

Lugubert

Desperately trying to get into the start of a thread, I'll just throw in two instances that I (think I) remember from Alvar Ellegård's Jesus – One Hundred Years Before Christ: A Study In Creative Mythology (or via: amazon.co.uk).
The disciples were accused of ripping of corn ears on a Sabbath. Jesus preached that OT laws should be adhered to. Solution: According to the Essene calendar, it was no Sabbath day.

Towards the end, the disciples were told to walk into a village where they would find a lamb prepared for Easter. How could there be just one lamb waiting for them, when everybody prepared them? Solution: The cooking time was correct for the Essene calendar, so anyone having a lamb ready must, like the disciples, be an Essene.

If you find these clues insufficient, there are more in the book, like what this means for the Easter chronology, and also Ellegård sprinkles his interesting views with caveats and repeatedly points out that much of what he writes is conjecture but fits his general scheme.

rjf

I'm no biblical scholar or mideast historian, but don't Xians want Jesus not to be an Essene?

robto

Toto, this theory's been around for a long time - you can find it on many "Resolving Bible Contradictions" websites. There is no real evidence, though that Jesus was associated with the Essenes (his attitude toward Jewish Law was quite different from theirs), or that the Essene calendar actually resolves the issue (no calculation from the Essene calendar that shows Passover would be off by a day).


Then why didn't he reply to them "Today's not the Sabbath, you dummies"?

Ben C Smith

Christians are not a monolithic group.

Ben.

Ben C Smith

The idea that Jesus followed an Essene calendar was championed by A. Jaubert, La date de la Cene. I have not read this book, but IIRC Meier critiques it fairly thoroughly in the first volume of his Marginal Jew (or via: amazon.co.uk) series.

Ben.

Sheshbazzar

Regardless of what "Xians want, The Nazarene was NOT a "Xian" or a "X," and had nothing to do with their idolatrous veneration of iconic chicken scratchings and "sacred totem poles" (asherim)

The messianic groups that were in those days, whether holding unto the hope that a Messiah yet would come, or to the conviction that The Messiah had already came and lived amongst them, were still living strictly under the dictates of The Torah, in accordance with their individual groups best interpretation of its words, Laws, Statutes, and Commandments.

There were several groups that differed with the Jerusalem priesthood as to how certain passages of Torah were to be interpreted in calculating the proper times and counts used in calculating of the annual "High Day" Sabbaths. Each group, even each individual, calculating and following that lunar/solar calendar that seemed most reasonable and supportable by their own interpretation of the Torah text.
This practice was "unlawful" under The Law of the Jews, it being the exclusive prerogative set forth in Torah, for The Levitical Priesthood alone to issue binding decisions upon any and all such matters.
However, in the eyes of these groups and individuals, The Levitical Priesthood had been compromised, and had also compromised The Law, and had became no longer trustworthy in their sight. Thus, under their own strong convictions, they rejected the rule of The Levitical Priesthood, and Jerusalem.
For it was deemed a far worse thing that a man should compromise his own conscience, than violate a "Levitical" misinterpretation or misrepresentation of The Law.
To this day, Messianic groups, (not those calling themselves "Xtians") of which there are many, do not follow or keep the calendars dictated by "authorised" Judiasim, or that one imposed by Xtian fiat.
Each Messianic group watching the signs and the seasons, performing their own calculations and ordering their own calendars "High Sabbaths" in accordance with the strength of their own beliefs and convictions.

Malachi151

Hmm.. by explanation was that the author of John was suing this passage as an inspiration for his scene:

I find my explanation more plausible. He was using the reference to the breaking of the bones in his scene, and saw that this was on the 14th day of Nissan, so he set his story on that day.

Cege

I also find your explanation more plausible in explaining why the writer of GJohn placed the crucifixion a day before the other gospel accounts. He apparently found both a date and physical descriptions he believed was prophecy in the OT, and saw that Jesus' death could fit (or be fitted into).

John 19:31-37: Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down. The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe. These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: "Not one of his bones will be broken,"(Num. 9:12 NIV) and, as another scripture says, "They will look on the one they have pierced." (Zech. 12:10 NIV)

aa5874

Has the Pope lost his 'infallible' status and is he still an inerrantist? I think he is the world's leading 'harmonizer' of NT events.