to the congregations of God

Members discussing and researching current issues facing the congregations of God today

UCG response to Errors in the date of the crucifixion

Below is the email sent by Jorge de Campos, a member of the UCG Council of Elders. (permission was granted to publish this email) and  is the reply to the document titled Are the UCG dates of the crucifixion proof of the Jewish calendar? Research on the contents of this email was done, and the findings are documented in the article Analysis of the Churches of God's use of the Jewish Calendar.


Thanks for your query.
I am going to give a brief and simple reply. I am fully aware that the subject is complicated but I hope this simple reply is helpful and sufficient.
 

1)  The year of Christ’s death is determined by fulfilment of prophecy and not by rolling back the Hebrew Calendar (HC).

Basically: Dan 9:25
à 69 weeks ... 483 years from 457BC till 27AD (Note: fall dating and no year zero)
Year that Christ started His ministry (about Trumpets) 27AD + 3 ∏ years = Passover 31AD – year of His death.

2)  Therefore 31AD has to have a Wednesday Passover to fulfill prophecy.


3) There was a seasonal shift correction in the intercalation sequence of leap years of the HC sometime during 2nd / 3rd century – some say 142AD, others say 162AD and others say 256AD. When it occurred it is immaterial for our purpose.

That is the explanation of the calendric differences highlighted from the UCG Appendix to the sources referred in the attached document.

In effect it means this:
How accurate is the HC?
a)      Versus the moon cycle:


One lunar month has 29.53059 days. It is interesting to note that according to NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), the time between one new moon and the next is 29.530588 days. The difference between NASA’s figures and the Hebrew Calendar is 0.000002 or two millionths of a day (The Essence of the Holy Days: Insights from the Jewish Sages by Avraham Yaakov Finkel, 1993, p. 141).
                So there is no deviation there. No problem here.
b)      Versus the solar cycle:


– The average length of the HC year is 365.2468 days.
– The actual solar tropical year (time from equinox to equinox) is of 365.24219 days.
– The HC year is 0.00461 days longer than the solar year,
         or about 2 hours longer every 19 years,
         or one day longer every 216 years causing a ‘seasonal shift’.


                Therefore a seasonal shift correction is required to correct that drift.
– A change in the intercalation sequence of leap years (by moving it by one year) corrects that drift.
   For instance:

FROM

2

5

7

10

13

16

18

31AD with intercalation

TO

3

6

8

11

14

17

19

31AD without intercalation


The ‘TO’ line is what the HC uses today. The ‘FROM’ is what was used in 31AD.
– The HC ‘pattern’ for the intercalary sequence does not change. It remains 3-3-2-3-3-3-2.  Which means it intercalates in the 3rd year, and intercalate again after another 3 years (in the 6th year), then intercalate after 2 years (in the 8th year), etc..
– By delaying the intercalation sequence by one year in the second or third century (from the 2nd year to the 3rd year, and from the 5th year to the 6th, etc.), in effect they moved forwards the 19-year cycle by one month, counteracting the seasonal shift of one day every 216 years till about year 6000 of the HC.
– Another correction is required by year 6000 of HC (because we now in year 5776, it is over 200 years from today) according to www.thesanhedrin.org.


The websites’ calculators which were used as ‘comparison sources’ in the attached document did not take into account that delay in intercalation sequence. The UCG Appendix refers to calculators which do take that sequence change into account. This following calculator also takes into account the referred to intercalation sequence change. http://www.cgsf.org/dbeattie/calendar/?roman=31  

Yours kindly
Jorge de Campos