Mark,

What I think is that you are approaching the subject with a 21st-century mentality. All ancient peoples struggled with their calendars. Even in Babylonia, the cradle of astronomy, “the intercalation was operated haphazardly, according to real or imagined needs, and each Sumerian city inserted months at will; e.g., 11 months in 18 years or two months in the same year. Later, the empires centralized the intercalation, and as late as 541 B.C.E. it was proclaimed by royal fiat.”

However,

“Whenever the king felt that the calendar had slipped too far out of step with the seasons, he ordered another extra month. However, the Babylonian calendar was quite confused until the 300's B.C.E., when the Babylonians began to use a more reliable system.”

“Improvements in astronomical knowledge eventually made possible the regularization of intercalation; and, under the Persian kings (c. 380 B.C.E.), Babylonian calendar calculators succeeded in computing an almost perfect equivalence in a lunisolar cycle of 19 years and 235 months.”

http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-ancient.html (also here some interesting information about the 360-day year)

But while Babylonia was struggling to find a correct way to intercalate their calendar and only discovered it in the fourth century B.C., the Jews, since 1500 B.C., had a simple and practical system of intercalation, based on nature, which worked like the 19-year cycle the Babylonians took so long to discover. (That it worked like the 19-year cycle, as I said, was demonstrated by modern karaites.)

There are two ancient abib reports preserved in the Talmud. These accounts were both preserved in Palestinian Aramaic, and not the usual Babylonian Aramaic, which suggests they may date back at least to the 2nd century CE, if not to the actual period of the events described. The first one dates to the last generation of the Second Temple period:

"For it has been taught: It once happened that Rabban Gamaliel was sitting on a step on the Temple Mount, and the well known Scribe Yohanan was standing before him with three cut sheets [of parchment] lying before him. [Rabban Gamaliel said] ...take the third [sheet] and write to our brethren, the Exiles of Babylon and to those in Media, and to all the other exiled [sons] of Israel, saying: ‘May your peace be great forever! We beg to inform that the doves are still tender and the lambs are still too young and the Abib is not yet ripe. It seems advisable to me and to my colleagues to add thirty days to this year.’" (Babli Sanhedrin 11b)

A second Abib Report is also preserved in the Talmud, this one dating to the first generation after the destruction of the Second Temple:

"R. Yannai said in the name of R. Simeon b. Gamaliel [quoting his letter to the Communities]: 'We beg to inform you that the doves are still tender and the lambs still young, and the Abib is not yet ripe. I have considered the matter and thought it advisable to add thirty days to the year.'" (Babli Sanhedrin 11a).

These historical reports confirm that this system was still being used in the first or second century CE, before the precalculated calendar was adopted.

Qumran, on the other hand, was an isolated community whose practices and teachings differed from Israel, and they declared the Jews were in apostasy. To them the temple was a corrupt place they would not visit and the Jewish calendar was in error. As to Jesus, however, when He is reported to have attended the Temple, He is shown to have done so in conjunction with the official dates.

quote:

---

I’ve addressed these points but I don’t think you have addressed mine.

---

Sorry if I missed some point. Which point haven’t I addressed?

quote:

---

Also, you don’t seem to be following what I’ve said about the three years of the AB calendar.

---

Mark, you are working on the basis of speculations. For most scholars the Qumran community had only a 364-day “solar” calendar. You’ve added a lunar calendar and now a 360-day calendar. What authority can you quote in support of a 360-day calendar for the Qumran community? Also, how can the October 22, 1844 date be demonstrated using any of these calendars, beginning with 457 B.C.?

You are adopting the secular view that technology has continually advanced from ancient times, but this if false. The antidiluvians were advanced far beyond our current technology. Physical evidence is beginning to surface to that effect. For example, in the 1940's or 50's a hammer with a petrified wood handle was found with a head made of a steel alloy with something like 2% chlorine. It does not rust. No one has made an alloy like that yet in modern times.

Because the early Babylonians may have been primative does it follow that the rest of the world was equally backward? How much research have you done of say ancient Egypt or of China? And what of the civilization where no record survives? Since those descended from Noah knew much of the technology from before the flood, we cannot assume backwardness where no records survive.

No Rosangela, I don't see an openness to look candidly at the evidence. Your statement about the opinions of the DSS scholars on the lunar, solar and 360 days of the Qumran calendar is incorrect. The consensus of opinion among scholars is that the community was as much attuned to the lunar cycle as they were the solar. While they set their religious feasts by the solar months, the lunar cycle was consistently cross-referenced. These calendrical documents are called Mishmarot apparently.

It is true that evidence of the existence of the 360 day calendar in Qumran is sparce, but that it is indicated plainly in the AB calendar is not in question. I'll post a quote by James VanderKam, probably the leading American authority on the issue.

In saying above that the evidence for a 360 calendar at Qumran is sparce, I should add that all of the manuscripts from Cave 4, the cave with the Mishmarot texts, have not been released.

In the Conclusions chapter of the book, regarding the importance of the lunar segment of the calendar, VanderKam states:

quote:

---

Appearance of the 364-day solar year in the texts from the caves proves that the Qumran community belonged in the same calendrical tradition as the one embodied in I Enoch and Jubilees. But the cave 4 calendrical documents just as clearly set forth a schematic, 354-day lunar arrangement that was brought into alignment with the solar calendar by regular inter-calations. There is no clear indications in the texts that the lunar system was inferior as was the case in the Jubilees. Pages 272 and 3 of the ebook version of ‘Calendars in the Dead Sea Scrolls, James C. VanderKam.

---

Regarding the 360 day year in the AB calendar, VanderKam quotes I Enoch 75:1-2:

1 And the leaders of the heads of the thousands, who are placed over the whole creation and over all the stars, have also to do with the four intercalary days, being inseparable from their office, according to the reckoning of the year, and these render service on the four days which are not 2 reckoned in the reckoning of the year.

Then he states:

quote:

---

That is, the four days that are the distinctive trait of the schematic solar calendar in I Enoch are additional in some sense; the base year to which they are added at fixed intervals (in months 3, 6, 9 and 12)is one of 360 days. Pages 73 of the ebook version of ‘Calendars in the Dead Sea Scrolls, James C. VanderKam.

---

Mark,
The link I provided yesterday explains the Egyptian calendar

http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-ancient.html (the Egyptian calendar is just below the Babylonian).

And also the Chinese calendar

http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-chinese.html

I had taken a look at all of them and I see the same struggle of all ancient nations with their calendars.

As I said yesterday, the link also provides information about the 360-day calendar. It says:

"In the eighth century B.C.E., civilizations all over the world either discarded or modified their old 360 day calendars. The 360 day calendars had been in use for the greater part of a millennium. In many places, month lengths immediately after that change were not fixed, but were based instead upon observation of the sky."

I've even read somewhere in the Internet that some believe the orbit of the earth was once of 360 days.

Mark, I’m very practical, and I don’t see how this AB calendar could help with the 1844 question. It seems you cannot prove 1844 with the solar calendar since no one knows how to intercalate it. How was the lunar calendar intercalated? Can you prove 1844 with it – beginning at 457 B.C.?

Rosangela, did you notice this statement on the web site you linked to regarding the World Calendar, one of the two calendars that is being proposed to take the place of the Gregorian calendar:

quote:

---

The World Calendar is . . . divided into four quarters of 91 days each, with an additional day at the end of the year. In each quarter, the first month is of 31 days and the second and third of 30 days each. The extra day comes after December 30 and bears no month or weekday designation, nor does the intercalated leap year day that follows June 30. In the World Calendar January 1, April 1, July 1, and October 1 are all Sundays.

---

The first thing I want to draw attention to in this quote is that the description is close to the solar part of the AB calendar, and there is no problem with the intercalation issue. The solution offered here is just one of many possibilities. The AB calendar does not set out the rules of intercalation explicitly, but they are implied. It would be quite easy for an astronomer with average ability to design the intercalation rules. The above calendar which also has 364 days plus one intercalated day and a periodic leap day shows it is not hard to do.

The more important thing I want to draw your attention to however is that both of the proposed international calendars disturb the weekly cycle – another evidence that this issue will affect us in the future. The man of sin will again ‘think to change the times’. Daniel indicates this is especially an end time issue. So it is good to become familiar now with calendar issues and address the question of whether there is a Divine calendar. We need to consider the implications of taking a position that there is no Divine calendar. If there is no Divine calendar, there is no Sabbath.

You say the Karaite calendar is the Divine one, but that is just too incredible for all of the reasons I've posted and that I don't think you have addressed. The Karaites are like many Christians, they are selective in what they base their position on. Adventism cannot follow that example. All calendrical statements in scripture must be used.

Regarding how the AB calendar - the lunar segment - confirms both 31 AD and October 22, 1844 as the correct dates, my application of the calendar is in one of the first posts on the thread I think. I can repost it if you'd like.

Mark,

Any system of intercalation to the AB calendar can only be speculative, because the Book of Enoch mentions no system of intercalation.

As to the Karaite calendar, I’ve never said it is the divine calendar. What I said is that it was a simple, practical and temporary calendar God designed for the Israelites to use until the coming of the Messiah. I don’t think it was used before the Israelites left Egypt, and I don’t think it should be used after the cross. Yet it is the only calendar described in the Bible.

Although apocalyptic prophecy uses a 360-day calendar, the number 360 was chosen because of its symbolism. It’s a multiple of 3, 12 and 10, three key numbers in apocalyptic prophecy. But the reckoning of prophetic time is done in terms of years of 365.2422 days.

I think I’ve addressed all your objections, but I don’t think you have addressed the points I made. I think we will simply have to disagree.

If I’m not mistaken, at some point you mentioned that the intercalation of this lunar calendar was thought to be made using 8-year cycles; this would produce an error of one day every five years (much less accurate than the Metonic cycle).

In order to prove that this calendar helps in the question of 1844, you would have to begin at the beginning – 457 B.C. William H. Shea tried to prove October 22, 1844 using the Metonic cycle, but failed to take into consideration that the reckoning of the 2300 days involves Julian calendar dates, Gregorian calendar dates, and solar years, besides the fact that he accepted Froom’s wrong scheme of Tishri 10 as October 21/22. Thus, he obviously wasn't able prove the date convincingly.

As to the Sabbath, it was always and will always be dependent on the weekly cycle, not on the yearly calendar, so this question has nothing to do with a Divine calendar. Besides, I don't think the weekly cycle will be modified in the future, because this would do away not only with the Sabbath, but also with Sunday - and both days have a fundamental role in the last crisis.

Well, Rosangela, you think there can be a weekly Sabbath without a Divine calendar? That is unfortunate.

Here is the plan of the Solar aspect of the AB calendar and how it should be intercalated in my opinion:

An eight year cycle is used so that no intercalations take place during that cycle. That means the calendar falls behind the actual solar year by about 10 days in eight years – 1.2422 x 8 = 9.9376 days. The solar part of the AB calendar must be intercalated using weeks according to the text. So the first rule of intercalation (of the solar part) is that a week is added every 8 years. The excess in days, 1.9376 has to be made up by adding a second week periodically. The second rule of intercalation is that the excess is made up using convergence by adding a second week every fourth eight year cycle leaving a remainder of .7504 days. That requires adding a third week once in every 40th eight year cycle (every 320th year) and a fourth week every 560th eight year cycle (every 4,480th year), and so on. This system is completely accurate except for the fact that the year itself is changing in length. And it only has two rules – one week every eight years, and the excess being made up by the second convergence rule.

Would you like to see my lunar intercalations?

Edited to correct the last part of the calculations - Mark S.

[ December 11, 2005, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Mark Shipowick ]

It would be a mistake to underestimate the importance of calendar reform in the end times. The key characteristic of the papal institution is its claim to be the final authority in temporal and secular matters. It has a long history of imposing its will on the people contrary to scripture. We cannot afford to be naive. It would be completely consistent with the Papal character to endorse a calendar that disturbs the weekly cycle. Sunday will still be Sunday in this new calendar, but for 'convenience, world harmony, business facilitation etc' it will be 'adjusted' one day each year and two in leap years.