Rosangela, the Astronomical Book (AB) calendar has two sets of months: One set is solar and the other is lunar. I mentioned above that I am not clear on how the two sets are intercalated, but in the case of the lunar months we can be sure that a complete lunar month was added from time to time. With a prescribed lunar year of 354 days, the AB says that the moon falls behind the sun 30 days in 3 years, 50 in five and 80 in eight. This observation suggests that the intercalated lunar months should fall in those years, and interestingly, in the modern Jewish calendar, the 3rd, 6th and 8th years have been selected for intercalation in the 19 year cycle that the modern Jews observe - almost the same as in the AB - at least for the first part of the cycle.

Mark,

This does not make sense. No community can follow two sets of months, for there would be no understanding between the members of that community. While some were at a month according to the solar calendar, others would be at another month according to the lunar calendar. While some were at a year according to the solar calendar, others would be at another year according to the lunar calendar. Not to mention what a confusion this would make with the observance of religious festivals.

Rosangela, you don't seem to have studied the calendar. It is in Enoch 72 to 81. You can find at least two good English translations by using a search engine. John Pratt has posted the Lawrence version on his site. There is a link to one of his articles in my second post that will take you to his site and a link in the article that will take you to Enoch.

Rule 7 of my rules gives the basic structure of how the dual monthly reckonings worked. The 'rules' are in my second post.

In addition, scholars agree that in Qumran there is evidence of a dual set of months. S Talmon, possibly the best known authority on the Qumran calendars (he believes that there are a few permutations of the calendar in Qumran) affirms this among others.

I said above that the New Moon seems to be reckoned in the AB from the first morning that it becomes visible based on the passage I quoted which was from the Charles translation of Enoch. But, if this is an inspired calendar, this cannot be correct because scripture reckons the day from evening to evening. So, I’ve had a second look at that passage in the Lawrence translation and at other related passages and it does look like I misspoke: The AB appears to designate the New Moon in the same way that the Karaites do – the first visible portion shortly after sunset. This would harmonize with the scriptural reckoning of the day.

Here is the passage in the Lawrence translation:

quote:

---

4 Thus it [the moon] rises, and at its commencement towards the east goes forth for thirty days.

5 At that time it appears, and becomes to you the beginning of the month. Thirty days it is with the sun in the gate from which the sun goes forth. [Charles translation is quite different here. It says the beginning of the month is on the 30th day that the sun goes forth.]

6 Half of it is in extent seven portions, one half; and the whole of its orb is void of light, except a seventh portion out of the fourteen portions of its light. And in a day it receives a seventh portion, or half that portion, of its light. Its light is by sevens, by one portion, and by the half of a portion. Its sets with the sun.

7 And when the sun rises, the moon rises with it; receiving half a portion of light.

8 On that night, when it commences its period, previously to the day of the month, the moon sets with the sun.

9 And on that night it is dark in its fourteen portions, that is, in each half; but it rises on that day with one seventh portion precisely, and in its progress declines from the rising of the sun.

10During the remainder of its period its light increases to fourteen portions. Enoch 74:4-10

---

The meaning in the above passage seems to be that on the 30th day of the lunar month the moon is invisible as it sets with the sun, but in the following day when the new month begins it receives a fourteenth part of its light, that is, half of one seventh of its light because the moon grows by sevenths.

Regarding the reckoning of months in the solar part of the AB calendar there are two possible configurations:

1) 30-30-30-1 repeated four times for a total day count of 364 and:
2) 30 x 12 plus 4 for a total day count of 364.

In both of the above reckonings the month always has 30 days. The difference between the first and second versions is that extra four days are assigned one per season in version 1 but are lumped together at the end of the year in version 2.

There is evidence in the AB and in the Qumran documents that both versions/arrangements of the solar months were used. In the case of the AB, both versions appear in the same calendar, so it seems that for the purpose of the determining the seasons version 1 is used but for determining the time/date, version 2 is used.

At first glance this appears to be a complex and confusing system, but let’s try to piece it together. If this is a divine calendar it will be based on simple principles; In fact, this is a an important test of its validity – does it operate in a simple manner? If not, it has to be rejected as having an inspired origin. But before we can give the full picture we need to look at the individual parts. I’ll try to bring them together in the near future. In the mean time, if anyone is looking at the AB calendar besides me, and you see I’ve overlooked something, please let me know.

Getting back to the two solar reckonings of months, the second reckoning would have to be the inspired reckoning for dates and tracking duration of time because in every case where the number of days is given in scripture for a series of months, the month always has exactly 30 days. So the first version cannot be the correct one for reckoning time in scripture because every third month has an extra day added to it.

Interestingly, there are two calendars in use today, the Coptic and the Ethiopic, that have a 364 day year and that reckon the months according to version 2 – that is 12 x 30 plus 4. These calendars are included in the 7000 Year Calendar software that I put a link to in my second post at the beginning of this thread. What is especially interesting about this is that these communities were home to the branch of the early Christian church that held the Book of Enoch in high regard.
The history of the Book of Enoch and it’s influence among the Coptic and Ethiopic churches is summarized in this fascinating comment at the http://www.heaven.net.nz/writings/enoch.htm website.

quote:

---

The Book of Enoch was extant centuries before the birth of Christ and yet is considered by many to be more Christian in its theology than Jewish. It was considered scripture by many early Christians. The earliest literature of the so-called "Church Fathers" is filled with references to this mysterious book. The early second century "Epistle of Barnabus" makes much use of the Book of Enoch. Second and Third Century "Church Fathers" like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origin and Clement of Alexandria all make use of the Book of Enoch. Tertullian (160-230 C.E) even called the Book of Enoch "Holy Scripture". The Ethiopic Church even added the Book of Enoch to its official canon. It was widely known and read the first three centuries after Christ. This and many other books became discredited after the Council of Laodicea. And being under ban of the authorities, afterwards it gradually passed out of circulation.

At about the time of the Protestant Reformation, there came to be a renewed interest in the Book of Enoch which had long since been lost to the modern world. By the late 1400's rumors began to spread that somewhere a copy of the long lost Book of Enoch might still exist. During this time many books arose claiming to be the long lost book and were later found to be forgeries.

The return of the long lost Book of Enoch to the modern western world is credited to the famous explorer James Bruce, who in 1773 returned from six years in Abyssinia with three Ethiopic copies of the lost book. In 1821 Richard Laurence published the first English translation. The famous R.H. Charles edition was published in 1912. In the following years several portions of the Greek text surfaced. Then with the discovery of cave 4 of the Dead Sea Scrolls, seven fragmentary copies of the Aramaic text were discovered.

---

The significance of the last quote is to suggest that of all modern calendars, the Jewish and the Coptic/Ethiopic come closest to the AB model. The AB model does not include several of the rabbinic rules that have been added, but it does make the lunar cycle prominent. The Coptic/Ethiopic calendars are deficient in that they make no allowance for the lunar cycle. My hypothisis is that the AB brings it all together and gives the sun and the moon their proper roles as timekeepers - the role that was assigned to them by God on the fourth day of creation when the heavenly bodies were made. Are there any questions or comments? If not I'll continue on . . .

In a post above I noted that the modern Jewish calendar has two New Years – one in the spring for the religious New Year, and one six months later in the fall for the civil New Year. This may be a corruption of the AB calendar which also has two starting points for the New Year. In the AB there is the Solar New Year and the Lunar New Year, the solar New Year being defined as the first day that is longer than night in the spring. See Rule 1 in my second post at the beginning of the thread. The Lunar New Year appears to be defined as the first new moon after the Solar New Year.

In the modern Jewish calendar (which was probably not the same as the calendar used by the Jews of Christ’s day) the lunar cycle is aligned with the seasons by inserting extra months – seven of them in a 19 year cycle. But there is no direct use of the sun to maintain the alignment.

After the dispersion in 70 AD, (possibly several centuries after that date,) the Jews adopted the current 19 year cycle, This cycle is so close to the average solar New Year that it is actually more accurate in maintaining its alignment with the sun than the Gregorian calendar! And unlike the Gregorian calendar it does this without any direct reference to the sun.

One has to admire the astronomical abilities of the rabbis of that time. They did excellent work, but unfortuantly they ignored the fact that the sun is the primary time keeper and the moon is secondary. Like the modern Jewish calendar, the AB calendar also allows for intercalated lunar months, apparently in the 3rd 5th and 8th years, but the primary year is always solar and the secondary year lunar.

The Jew of Qumran community seem to have preserved the primary role of the sun in their calendars but at the same time there is evidence that the lunar cycle was used to define the feast days. The majority of scholars find that the solar month rather than the lunar was used to define the religious festivals, but I have not seen enough evidence yet to be persuaded that that was the case. If it was, the Qumran calendar would be a corruption of the AB calendar because after studying the structure of the latter, I have no doubt that it is in complete agreement with the lunar cycle of the Hebrew feasts of Leviticus 23.

Now that the basic structure of the AB calendar has been set out, (for a review/summary, see my seven rules in the second post) the main questions remaining are:

1) How were additional days or weeks or months added to the solar cycle. It seems to have been adjusted every 5 years. More on this shortly, I hope.

2) Regarding the lunar cycle, it is quite certain that a complete lunar month was added periodically to the lunar cycle. See above. It appears this was done on years 3, 5 and 8 of an eight year cycle. It is not clear though how the cycle repeats - for example is year 8 also the first year of the next cycle?

3) Was there or is there a repeating pattern between the solar and lunar months that would allow for a simple way of cross-referencing the dates of the solar and lunar months/years.

Well, I haven't been able to figure the intercalations out. The seven rules I posted at the beginning is as far as I've been able to get.

To recap, this is the only calendar I'm aware of that reconciles the biblical 30 day month with the biblical lunar months. I am confident of that statement.

The seven rules that I listed appear to hold true. And it seems likely that there is a simple way to cross-reference the lunar and solar months. The calendar gives additional rules that I haven't organized into a list because I'm not sure how they apply, but the rules I have not listed apparently are for cross-referencing. The method of aligning it with the seasons is clear in rule 1. If anyone can help out, I think you'll find the exercise rewarding.

I've made some progress I think. The 7 basic rules I posted above have held good so far. Regarding the cross-referencing of lunar and solar months it appears that a list like the ones found at Qumran would be needed - not more than seven of them - to cross-reference the lunar and solar dates. The solar months would be used for business but the feast days determined by the lunar month. So the only cross-referencing would be for the purpose of confirming the lunar feast days in the solar calendar.

In general, the AB calendar appears to be more practical than ours because it allows for the same day to fall in every month. For example, the first day of the second solar month is always a Friday etc. To put it another way, this calendar does away with the need to print a new calendar every year because the days of the week align in the same way every year. The calendar is re-aligned with the seasons at the end of an eight year cycle and the seasonal drift during that time is only about 9 days.

The Qumran community appears to have made the realignment on a seven year basis but as I mentioned above the Astronomical Book seems to call for an eight year cycle. John Pratt in his article (see link above) has suggested a way that the people of Qumran kept their calendar in sync with the seasons. I think his approach is possible but unlikely because it has exactly the same weakness that the Julian calendar did - a slow seasonal drift based on a 365.25 day year. The AB calendar solves that problem by implying that the extra intercalated week or weeks at the end of the eight years will be determined by the alignment of both the sun and the moon. How? I’m not sure. I can say though that on a scale of one to five, the AB calendar is a five in terms of its practicality, (assuming the intercalations are worked out at the end of the eight year cycle in a simple way) it’s biblical respect for the roles of the sun and moon as time keepers, and its being the only calendar that I have seen that reconciles the biblical 30 day month with the lunar month.

Maybe some of you are asking "Why is Mark puting this level of energy into this?" The main reasons for doing it are 1)prophecy: all of the long prophecies are based on a 30 day month, so people who are students of prophecy would be helped if they had some basis for a 30 day month and a 360 day year and 2) all the indications I have seen are that calendar reform will become a signifant issue in the future. The International Standards Organization which now has tremendous clout has already issued a calendar standard that makes Sunday the seventh day of the week. It is ISO-8601 which declares Monday as the first day of the week.