Continues from "The Very First Known Roman 'Crucifixion'", here.
Found on pages 156-7 of Rome, Day One is Plutarch's Romulus 16,4-5:
4 Romulus, that he might perform his vow in the most acceptable manner to Jupiter, and withal make a pomp of it delightful to the eye of the city, cut down a tall oak which he saw growing in the camp, which he trimmed to the shape of a trophy, and fastened on it Acron's whole suit of armor disposed of in proper form; then he himself, girding his clothes about him, and crowning his head with a laurel garland, his hair gracefully flowing, 5carried the trophy resting erect upon his right shoulder, and so marched on, singing songs of triumph, and his whole army following after, the citizens all receiving him with acclamations of joy and wonder. The procession of this day was the origin and model of all after triumphs.
Of course, I shouldn't have to remind you that the Greek for trophy is τρόπαιον, and the Latin, tropaeum.
And here is a fresco painting in Pompeii of Romulus carrying a tropaeum.
And here is a carved depiction of Jesus, carrying a tropaeum. Which, of course, is a cross. Note the close similarity between the two.
Ivory plaque with Pilate Washing His Hands, Christ Bearing the Cross, and Peter Denying Christ, Rome, c. 420-30, from the Maskell ivories. The Trustees of the British Museum, London
Source: Art Blog by Bob.
And at the end of the carrying of the Cross, or tropaeum, Jesus is nailed to it as a god. Just like the wax image of Julius Caesar.
Ivory Plaque with Judas Hanging Himself, Jesus Crucified, and the Centurion Longinus Stabbing Jesus' Side; Rome, c. 420-30, from the Maxwell ivories. The Trustees of the British Museum, London.
Source: The British Museum website.
After the defeat of Acron,king of the Caeninenses, Romulus, the founder of Rome, "cut down a monstrous oak that grew in the camp, hewed it into the shape of a trophy [διεμόρφωσενὥσπερτρόπαιον], and fitted and fastened to it the armour of Acron, each piece in its due order." (Plutarch, Romulus 16, 4; Bernadotte Perrin translation (1924))
Where the Greek denotes:
διεμόρφωσεν: 3rd person singular aorist active, "[he] gave [it] shape to" ὥσπερ: adverb of manner, "even as" τρόπαιον: noun singular neuter accusative "a trophy, tropaeum."
This event occurred somewhere around 750 BCE.
Now what is the affixing of enemy armor to do with "crucifixion?" Simple. The shape of a trophy in ancient Roman times was nothing other than a cross. Observe:
Here is a depiction of a tropaeum on Trajan's column.
Note well that it is shown in the shape of a cross and is dressed with enemyarmor.
And here is Alexamenos' donkey-headed god, fastened to and suspended on a tropaeum.
This is the sort of thing that all Christian depictions of the Crucifiction are modeled on and what nearly all people including scholars think of when they hear the word "crucify" or its cognates.
Now
Irenaeus (130 – 202 CE) wrote a number of works, including references to his
alleged crucifixion in Against Heresies
(Latin: Adversus haereses) and Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching.
With the two works, one learns that Irenaeus was convinced Jesus was crucified
in 42 CE at the earliest, during Emperor Claudius’ reign.
First,
his Against Heresies II.22. In paragraph 1, Irenaeus completely
trashes the Synoptic timeline of Jesus’ career, particularly as outlined in gLuke 3:23 & 4:19:
There are not, therefore, thirty
Æons, nor did the Saviour come to be baptized when He was thirty years old….
Moreover, they affirm that He suffered in the twelfth month, so that He
continued to preach for one year after His baptism; and they endeavour to
establish this point out of the prophet (for it is written, “To proclaim the
acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of retribution” [Isaiah 61:2]),
being truly blind,… not understanding that which is called by Isaiah the
acceptable year of the Lord, nor the day of retribution. For the prophet
neither speaks concerning a day which includes the space of twelve hours, nor
of a year the length of which is twelve months. 1
The
last may be true, but there is no indication that Luke understands this as
allegorical. In fact, NT scholars link
it to the Jewish year of Jubilee in Leviticus 25:10. Irenaeus
does, though, in order to refer to the Church Age, “the whole time of faith
during which men hear and believe the preaching of the Gospel, and those become
acceptable to God who unite themselves to Him.” 1
Now
that we have established a baseline, that Irenaeus does not accept the Synoptic
timeline, we shall go on to figure out when he thought Jesus was crucifed.
In the
beginning of paragraph 3, he follows the common practice of harmonizing the
gospels, stating that “after His baptism, the Lord went up, at the time of the
Passover [sic], to Jerusalem, in accordance with what was the practice of the
Jews from every land, and every year, that they should assemble at this period
in Jerusalem, and there celebrate the Passover. [sic]” 3 The Passovers he cites are the three in
gJohn: the first right after Jesus’ water into wine demonstraion at Cana
(2:13), the second according to Irenaeus is where Jesus cures the man disabled
for 38 years at the Pool of Aesculapius in Jerusalem (5:1-15), and just before
he feeds a vast crowd with five loaves of bread at Lake Galilee (6:4), the third
and last six days after he raises Lazarus from the dead in Bethany (11:54,
12:1) where he gets questioned by the Jewish Sanhedrin, tried, convicted and sentenced
by Pilate and whacked by the Romans. Well so far, so good: irenaeus has Jesus
now observing three Passovers after his baptism. That means he should be about
32 or 33, correct?
Not on
your life!
For in
the beginning of paragraph four, Irenaeus claims Jesus, after his baptism, came
to Jerusalem “possessing the full age of a Master… so that he might properly be
acknowledged by all as a Master.” 4
He goes on to say that Jesus fulfilled every age of humanity: infants,
children, youths, old men [and women], passing “through every age,” and thus
“sanctifying” each stage a a person’s life. 5
Now in
the fifth paragraph, we get to the key of Irenaeus’ reasoning: he admits to
Jesus beginning to being about thirty years of age when he was dunked in the
River Jordan by John the Baptist:
For when He came to be baptized,
He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about
thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed
it: “Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old,” [Luke 3:23]
when He came to receive baptism) 6
But he
goes on that Jesus lived far longer than just one year or even three-and-a-half
years! Nota bene:
Now, that the firststage of early life embraces thirty years,
and that this extends onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but
from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age,
which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher 7
Irenaeus
is clearly arguing that Jesus lived to an advanced age, past the age of 50,
much like Julius Caesar (100 – 44 BCE) who was stabbed in the porch of Pompey’s
Theatre and crucified in imagine two
or five 8 days later. And what
evidence does he have for this, since the extant Canonical Gospels so clearly
stare he had a one-year ministry (Synoptics) or a two-to-three year ministry
(gJohn)? Well he tells you:
…even as the Gospel and all the
elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of
the Lord, [affirming] that John conveyed to them that information.And he remained among them up to the times of
Trajan.Some of them, moreover, saw not
only John, but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from
them, and bear testimony as to the [validity of] the statement. 9
Here is
is stating he got the information from the elders of the churches in southwest
Asia Minor, and the elders got the information from the Apostles, including
John, who, according to Irenaeus, stayed with them in Asia Minor until the
times of Emperor Trajan (r. 98-117 CE).
And
from the sixth paragraph we find that it is John’s Gospel he is referring to
when he says the Gospel testifies to the fact that he attained old age and the
status of a teacher:
But, besides this, those very
Jews who then disputed with the Lord Jesus Christ have most clearly indicated
the same thing. For when the Lord said to them, “Your father Abraham rejoiced
to see My day; and he saw it, and was glad,” they answered Him, “You are not
yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” [John 8:56-57] 10
He then
argues that if he was just over the age of thirty, the fellow Jews of Jesus who
were questioning him would certainly not say, “You are not yet fifty years
old,” but rather “You are not yet forty years old.” But the whole point of the
Jews’ questioning him was that they knew just from observation that Jesus was
much younger than Abraham, and would certainly not have been old enough to have
seen Abraham’s day. Which, for that purpose, fifty would have been just as much
a suitable number as forty; who cares if the person of the story in
question.was just over thirty or just under fifty, or even a short time after?
But I digress. It certainly mattered to Irenaeus, who makes a very big issue
out of it. 11
Now we
do not have the information in Against Heresies as to what year Jesus was
allegedly crucified in, for that we have to look in his Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching. Here, he cheerfully states
that he was executed during the procuratorship / prefecture of Pontius Pilate,
but during the Government of Claudius Caesar (24 January 41 – 13 October 54)!
And this is what Irenaeus wrote: “For Herod the king of the Jews and Pontius
Pilate, the governor of Claudius Caesar, came
together and condemned Him to be crucified.” (emphasis mine) 12
So the
crucifixion would have occurred sometime around 42 CE or later. 13 Apparently Irenaeus is privy to a
tradition that is not in any of the Canonical Gospels. Not only is the date far removed from Eusebius
and Tertullian’s guesses and Pontius Pilate’s prefecture of 26-36 CE, but his
source for the trial of Jesus apparently has Herod as a presiding official alongside Pilate, as in the Gospel of
Peter.And Irenaeus continues the
above quoted sentence with the following:
For Herod feared, as though He
were to be an earthly king, lest he should be expelled by Him from the kingdom.
But Pilate was constrained by Herod and the Jews that were with him against his
will to deliver Him to death: (for they threatened him) if he should not rather
do this than act contrary to Cæsar, by letting go a man who was called a king. 14
Conclusion:
Irenaeus
sets the crucifixion of Jesus around 42 CE or later, but no later that 54
CE.This is at variance from Eusebius
and Tertullian’s computed dates, which is indicative of confusion among the Apostolic
and Ante-Nicene Church Fathers as to the actual date of the crucifixion.
8.Depending on whether you trust
the ancient historians, who state the funeral of Julius Caesar was on March 17,
or the bulk of modern scholarship, which says it was on March 20.
9.Against
Heresies
II.22.1, pgh. 5.
10.Ibid., beginning pgh. 6
11.Ibid., read the rest of pgh. 6.
Here is the key quote: “Now, such language is fittingly applied to one who has
already passed the age of forty, without having as yet reached his fiftieth
year, yet is not far from this latter period. But to one who is only thirty
years old it would unquestionably be said, “You are not yet forty years old.”
For those who wished to convict Him of falsehood would certainly not extend the
number of His years far beyond the age which they saw He had attained; but they
mentioned a period near His real age, whether they had truly ascertained this
out of the entry in the public register, or simply made a conjecture from what
they observed that He was above forty years old, and that He certainly was not
one of only thirty years of age. For it
is altogether unreasonable to suppose that they were mistaken by twenty years,
when they wished to prove Him younger than the times of Abraham. For what
they saw, that they also expressed; and He whom they beheld was not a mere
phantasm, but an actual being of flesh and blood. He did not then want much of
being fifty years old; and, in accordance with that fact, they said to Him,
“You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” (emphasis mine)
13.Assuming Jesus’ birth year of 4
BCE and a lifespan of at least 45 years, Jesus would have been crucified no
earlier than 42 CE. Cf. Wikipedia, Irenaeus,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus.
This article cites in its n. [46], Robert M Price. "Jesus at the Vanishing
Point," in James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy (eds.) The Historical
Jesus: Five Views. InterVarsity, 2009, p. 80-81. Ditto Wikipedia, On the Detection and Overthrow of the
So-Called Gnosis, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Detection_and_Overthrow_of_the_So-Called_Gnosis#Main_arguments,
n. [14]. Also, the ccel.org source linked in n. 12 indicates that Claudius did
not become Emperor until 42 CE.
Tertullian
(c. 160 – c. 225 CE) was one of the early Church Fathers who was a prolific
writed in the late Second and early Third Centuries CE. Now he had his own
reckoning of the date of Jesus’ alleged passion and crucifixion. In his An Answer
to the Jews (original Latin Adversus
Iudaeoshere),
Tertullian makes a case for Jesus fulfilling the role of the awaited Messiah
that was prophesied, or at least hinted at, to come at a particular time in the
so-called Daniel’s Seventy “Weeks” or hebdomads
(sevens) of subsequent Jewish history.
Tertullian
sets out his task, here:
Accordingly the times must be
inquired into of the predicted and future nativity of the Christ, and of His
passion, and of the extermination of the city of Jerusalem, that is, its
devastation. For Daniel says, that "both the holy city and the holy place
are exterminated together with the coming Leader, and that the pinnacle is
destroyed unto ruin." And so the times of the coming Christ, the Leader,
must be inquired into, which we shall trace in Daniel; and, after computing
them, shall prove Him to be come, even on the ground of the times prescribed,
and of competent signs and operations of His.
First,
he quotes Daniel’s prophecy, or rather, what Daniel wrote what the Archangel
Gabriel spoke to him (emphasis and
notation in brackets [..] mine):
Daniel I am now come out to imbue
thee with understanding; in the beginning of thy supplication went out a word.
And I am come to announce to thee, because thou art a man of desires; and
ponder thou on the word, and understand in the vision. Seventy hebdomads have been abridged upon thy commonalty, and upon
the holy city, until delinquency be made inveterate, and sins sealed, and
righteousness obtained by entreaty, and righteousness eternal introduced; and
in order that vision and prophet may be sealed, and an holy one of holy ones
anointed. And thou shalt know, and thoroughly see, and understand, from the
going forth of a word for restoring and rebuilding Jerusalem unto the Christ,
the Leader, hebdomads (seven and an
half, and) lxii [62] and an half: and it shall convert, and shall be built
into height and entrenchment, and the times shall be renewed: and after these lxii [62] hebdomads shall
the anointing be exterminated, and shall not be; and the city and the holy
place shall he exterminate together with the Leader, who is making His advent;
and they shall be cut short as in a deluge, until (the) end of a war, which
shall be cut short unto ruin. And he shall confirm a testament in many. In one hebdomad and the half of the
hebdomad shall be taken away my sacrifice and libation, and in the holy place
the execration of devastation, (and) until the end of (the) time consummation
shall be given with regard to this devastation.”
Next,
he lays out the timeline from Darius I of Persia to the birth of Jesus
according to the gospels of Matthew and Luke in the times of Augustus Caesar.
Apparently he doesn’t follow Daniel’s prophecy exactly or even closely, but
calls out the following:
·First,
a total of 70 hebdomads is reserved
for the city of Jerusalem shall be built into its ultimate height and
entrenchment, “if they [the Jews of Jerusalem] receive him.”
·Second,
if they don’t receive him, then at the end of the 62-1/2 hebdomads he is to be born, and “an holy one of holy ones is to be
anointed.”
·Third,
after an additional 7-1/2 hebdomads,
he is to suffer.
·Fourth
and last, after 1-1/2 hebdomads, the city of Jerusalem, including its holy
place, is to be destroyed, utterly.
So
Tertullian reckons the counting as beginning with the first year of Darius I (r. Sept 522 –
October 486 BCE), not, as present day Evangelical apologists usually do, from
the decree of Artaxerxes I to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem in 445 BCE. He
lists several Persian monarchs (he seems to drop quite
a few), then Alexander the Great of the Macedonian Empire,
then the rulers of the Ptolemaic
Empire (dropping several again) with the last ruler being Cleopatra (d. August 12, 30
BCE), after whom Caesar Augustus took power in the region and ruled for 43
years until August 19, 14 CE.
Tertullian
states that Jesus was born in the 41st year of Augustus’ reign, 1 28 years after the death of Cleopatra,
which would be in the late summer or autumn of 2 BCE. He also states that
Augustus lives for 15 more years until 14 CE.
Moreover,
the elapsed time since the first year of Darius I to the birth of Jesus,
Tertulian computed to be 437 years, 6 months. The actual elapsed time
(approximately 520 years) was considerably longer! So already he has gone off
the rails. But he charges on.
Next he
dives into the business of the “seven and a half hebdomads.” Now this we will go into as much detail as Tertullian
did:
·From
the birth of Jesus until Caesar Augustus’ death, 15 years.
·From
Augustus’ death Tiberius Caesar
held the vast Roman Empire for 20 years, 7 months and 28 days (actually
September 18, 14 CE to March 16, 37 CE, equaling 22 years, 5 months and 28
days).
·In
the fiftieth 2 (actually,
fifteenth) year. Jesus was crucified at about thirty years of age.
·Caius
“Caligula” Caesar: 3 years, 8 months and 13 days.
·Claudius
is missing!
·Nero
Caesar: 11 years, 9 months, 13 days.
·Galba:
7 months, 6 days.
·Otho:
3 days.
·Vitellus:
8 months, 27 days.
·Vespasian:
12 years, 6 months. Subdues the Jewish nation in the first year of his empire.
·From
the birth of Jesus to the fall
of Jerusalem (on Tisha B’Av = 29 or 30 July, 70 CE) is 72 years, 6 months.
This would put the birth of Jesus at about February 28, 2 BCE.
·When
Jerusalem was stormed by the Romans, the 70 hebdomads
were fulfilled.
Well
72-1/2 years are hardly seven and one-half hebdomads,
meaning “weeks,” “seven years,” or “septenary,” 3
which last add up to 52-1/2 years. And 592-1/2 years are hardly 70 hebdomads, or 490 years, either. But we
have the year in which Tertullian believes Jesus was crucified: the fifteenth
year of Tiberius, or 28-29 CE. Assuming de
facto years, this would be between September 18, 28 CE and September 18, 29
CE. This being on a Passover, would be in the Spring of 29 CE. As Tertullian
explains it:
And the suffering of this
extermination was perfected within the times of the lxx hebdomads, under Tiberius Cæsar, in the consulate of Rubellius
Geminus and Fufius Geminus, in the month of March, at the times of the passover,
on the eighth day before the calends of April, on the first day of unleavened
bread, on which they [all the Synagogue of Israel] slew the lamb at even, just
as had been enjoined by Moses.
This
would place the crucifixion of Jesus on about the 25th of March, Erev Pesach (which the NT calls the First
Day of Unleavened Bread), 29 CE. If we assume Accessional years by the Julian
calendar, the year would be the same. If non-Accessional, the year would change
to 28 CE.
Conclusion: although Tertullian has a
certain year in mind, he is in disagreement with Eusebius, who thinks the Crucifixion
occurred in 33 CE. Discrepancies such as this is to be expected, when the gospels
present us with nothing but confusion!
Notes:
1.I’m not sure how he figured this:
the Roman Empire was established January 16, 27 BCE, the starting point for
Augustus’ Empire. Does he mean to count Augustus’ Empire from the time the
Second Triumvirate was established or when he was elected one of two Consuls?
The former was in October 43 BCE; the latter was on August 19, 43 BCE.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus
In part
6b I have reached the conclusion – following the lead of theologian Dr. Raymond
E. Brown, that the confusion Eusebius exhibits over exactly when Jesus was crucified (if he was at
all!) stems from the fact that he tried to shoehorn all manner of disparate
secular historical data to fit the gospel narrative. To that I might add now,
to show fulfillment of Daniel’s Seventy “Weeks,” particularly where Daniel’s
prediction of an overthrow of Jerusalem by violence and warfare in the
seventieth “week,” i.e., the very week after Messiah was to be cut-off, or the
unction cast out. But I shall not concern myself with the Seventy Weeks here,
just the information the Gospels give for dating the Crucifixion.
6c-1. During Caiaphas’ Tenure.
Mark is
silent on which of the high priests during Tiberius’ tenure as Emperor was
presiding when Jesus was allegedly crucified. But the Gospels gMatthew, gLuke
and gJohn are in full agreement: it was Caiaphas: gMatthew states that the high
priest was called Caiaphas (gMatt
26:3, 57), gLuke states
that both “Annas” and Caiaphas were high priests the year John the Baptist
started his career (gLuke 3:2),
and gJohn states that Caiaphas was high priest the year that Jesus was hanged (gJohn 11:49, 18:13) .
Josephus
dates Caiaphas’ tenure from approximately 18 CE to 36 or 37 CE.1
6c-2. During Tiberius’ Tenure.
The
other three Gospels, gMark, gMatthew and gJohn, are silent on who was Emperor,
except by reference to Pilate, making Tiberius the Emperor by default. Luke,
though, is explicit: he states that John the Baptist started dunking people in
the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar’s government (gLuke 3:1), probably 28-29 CE. Jesus
gets dunked (gLuke 3:21) and a
short time later (gLuke 3:22), starts his own public career, which lasts about
a year. The other three give a range, therefore, of 14 to 37 CE, with gLuke
presenting a shorter stretch of about 28 or 29 to 37 CE.
6c-3: During Pilate’s Tenure.
Here,
all four gospels are in agreement: it was Pontius Pilate who was the ruling
Roman official at the time. The Passion narratives focusing on the Roman Trial,
Crucifixion and Burial are leavened throughout with references to the Roman
Prefect: gMark 15, gMatthew 27, gLuke 23 and gJohn 18:28-40, 19.
According
to the extant copies of Josephus, Pontius Pilate was prefect from eleven years
after Vitellus Gratus was appointed prefect, that is, about 26 CE,2 until he was recalled and ordered to stand
trial before the Emperor due to a massacre of Samaritans he committed by
Vitellus in 36 CE.3
So this
gives us a span of ten years, or, adding gLuke 3 into the mix, about seven to
eight years. It is necessary, therefore, to further narrow it down and come up
with a certain date. If that is possible.
6c-3.1 Excursus:
Not all
scholars are convinced that Pontius Pilate was the Roman Prefect of Judaea only
from 26-36 CE. Indeed, the context of both the sections of the Jewish War4
and Antiquities5 seems to indicate an accession by Pilate
in 18 or 19 CE.6 And this would
dovetail nicely with Eusebius’ complaint (see Part 6a) that the Roman
government under Maximinus
Daia forged a document that asserted that Jesus was crucifed in 21 CE.
6c-4: Day of the Month.
According
to the Gospels, the Crucifixion was supposed to have occurred either on the Day
before Passover, the 14th of Nisan, or on Passover itself, the 15th.
The
Synoptics: gMark, gMatthew and gLuke place the event on the 15th, since the
Last Supper was presented as a Passover
(gMark 14:12-18, gMatt 26: 17-20, gLuke 22:7-15). All three
identify the present-day Day before Passover, Erev Pesach, when the Passover lambs were slain, as the Day or
First Day of Unleavened Bread. There may be a Jewish precedent for this, since
the day before Passover is when observant Jews are supposed to look for all
the leavening (chomnetz) in their
houses and get rid of it (or eat it before a certain time). The Day before
Passover is for them the busiest time of the year and is most certainly a day
of preparation, just like the day before
the weekly Sabbath,Erev Shabbos,
is considered a day of preparation.
GJohn,
on the other hand, is on record that the crucifixion occurred on the Day of Preparation for the
Passover (gJohn 19:14), i.e., the 14th of Nisan, when the Passover lambs were slain at the House of the Holy Place (=
the Temple in Jerusalem), because at the trial before Pilate, the Jews refused to enter the Roman Court lest they be ritually defiled, because they want to prepare for and eat the Passover once the trial is done (gJohn 18:28).
Related
to this, is the scene in all four canonical gospels depicting a scene where
Pontius Pilate shows Jesus and and a certain Barabbas to the crowd, figuring
the crowd will ask that Jesus be released, as he would rather they do, according
to the gospels. Now this scene gives some scholars like John P. Meier reason (although a minor one) to
believe that originally, the Synoptics and gJohn were in agreement: that the
day of the month was Nisan the 14th.7
Except according to gMark, this was Pilate’s own habit: “At the festival it was
Pilate's custom to release for the
people a prisoner they requested.” (gMark
15:6).8 And according to both
Josephus and Philo, Pilate was keen on brutalizing the Jews and undermining
their laws. 9 So, assuming mark’s
account has any basis in historical fact, Pilate would not be compelled to
release any prisoner in time to enjoy the actual consuming of the Passover
including the lamb on Passover Eve, but rather he very well could have
customarily released him the following day.
6c-5: Day of the Week.
All
of the gospels are in agreement that the crucifixion was supposed to have
occurred on a Friday (Erev Shabbos),
although their readers are not privy to this information until about the end of
the duration of the crucifixion. The Synoptics announce this fact at the Burial
of Jesus: “It was the Preparation Day10
(that is, the day before the Sabbath11)”
(gMark 15:42). Here Mark is
referring to Erev Shabbos, not
necessarily to Erev Pesach. Matthew
just says the Jewish ruling class met with Pilate on “the next day, the one
after Preparation Day,” (gMatt
27:62) which is a rather goofy way of saying the Sabbath or even Passover
Day! Luke sees Preparation Day and the Sabbath as directly adjacent (gLuke 23:54), acknowledging the Jewish
reckoning of when a calendar day ends and the next one begins. John, on the
other hand, establishes that Sabbath Day as Passover Day (KJV: “for that Sabbath
day was an high day”`12) also
(gJohn 19:14, 19:31, 19:42). So Friday it is.
6c-6: Jesus’ Thirtieth Year.
Another clue is in gLuke 3:23, which states that when Jesus started his ministry (during or after Tiberius’ fifteenth year or 28-29 CE), he was about thirty years of age; except in the King James Version, the Young’s Literal Translation, the Latin Vulgate13 and the original Greek, even the 1904 Greek text used by the Greek Orthodox Church and the RP Byzantine majority Text 2005, the text states that Jesus was beginning to be about thirty years of age.14 Now we could be charitable and call that to be between the ages of 25 and 30, or be rather strict about it and assume that the Arabic text is correct in saying that “Jesus began to enter into the thirtieth year,”15 i.e., was just past his twenty-ninth birthday.
Either way, to determine the date when Luke infers the death of Jesus, we first have to figure out when Luke says Jesus was born. Well that is certainly not easy. Jesus’ nativity is linked with that of John the Baptist, so that, Luke establishes the birth of Jesus to be about fifteen or sixteen months after the annunciation (Zechariah, priest of the course of Abijah).16 Now Luke (gLuke 1:5, “In the days of Herod, King of Judea”; 1:26 “In the sixth month”, 1:39, “At that time” / “In these days”; and 2:1, “At that time” / “ In those days”) appears to establish the two pregnancies and two births to have occured during the reign of King Herod the Great,16 which ended at his death in March / April of 4 BCE.17 Unfortunately for Luke, he also stated that the point of time mentioned in gLuke 2:1 was also the time when Caesar Augustus issued an edict ordering a census for the vast Roman Empire, and that (gLuke 2:2) the census occurred when Quirinus was governor of Syria, which was in 6 CE!18 It appears that Luke has shoved the 6 CE Roman census of Judea under Quirinus back to 4 BCE or perhaps earlier, such as the Matthean implied date of late 7 / early 6 BCE (gMatt 2:1, 2:7, 2:16). Now when we do the math, late 7 / early 6 BCE to Sept 28 – Sept 29 CE gives us approximately 34 years, possibly 35. “About” 30 years of age, but finishing up with it, really, and going on 35. A birth in late 5 / early 4 BCE yields about 32 years, which is closer but no cigar. Placing the birth of Jesus sometime in 3 BCE and his baptism by John the Baptist in 28 CE would yield almost exactly 30 years of age. But we miss the all-important census under Quirinis that ties the nativity of Jesus into Roman world events, don’t we?
But since Luke said he was beginning to be about 30 years of age, we can go with two approximate ages for Jesus, 25 (if we’re generous) and 29 (strict like the Arabic text – see above), and a birth in 6-7 CE. With the two ages we get a baptism date of 31-32 CE or 35-36 CE. That’s pushing the crucifixion rather close to or even beyond the end of Pilate's prefecture if Jesus was about 29, but perhaps Luke has a reason for it: after all, Josephus situates the death of John the Baptist about 34 to 36 CE.19 So a birth in 6 CE and a baptism in 35 CE ties Luke’s gospel into Josephus’ Antiquities. Which means Luke not only has manage to shove Quirinus’ census back into Herod the Great’s day, he’s also kicked the census and baby Jesus back into the time when Judea was being reduced to a Roman province!
Another possible reference
to the Crufifixion is the age of the Temple noted in gJohn 2:20. Here, Jesus’ just previous statement was taken
by the angry Jewish authorities
to be a prediction of the destruction of the Second Temple. They note that the
Temple itself has been under construction for 46 years. Josephus gives us two
start of construction dates: 23 / 22 BCE and 20 / 19 BCE. 20 Adding forty-six years yields two dates
for this fracas: 24 / 25 CE and 27 / 28 CE respectively. 21 Noting that this is the first of three Passovers
in gJohn, 22 gives a terminal
date of 27 / 28 CE or 29 / 30 CE.
6c-8: Astronomical Confirmation
According
to Dr. Raymond E Brown, “Astronomy has played an important role in the
narrowing down the possible date of Jesus’ crucifixion. If Jesus died on the 14th
of Nisan, in which years during Pilate’s prefecture did that fall on Th[ursday
]n[ight]/F[riday ]d[aytime]?” 23 He
finds that the answer is not so obvious or certain, even though astronomers
back then were quite mathematically accurate. Adding to the difficulty is the fact
that the new moon had to be sighted accurately in Palestine, which could have
been thrown off by bad atmospheric conditions. 24
But it appears that the Jews in the Second Temple period determined their dates
by their lunar calendar, “and to keep it in approximate synchronicity with the
solar year leap months had to be added.” 25
Of course, we have exactly zero historical recores for when leap montyhs were
added during the years 27-30 CE. 26
Still, it appears that the most likely dates for when the death of Jesus on a
Friday, Nisan 14th, allegedly occurred were: 7 April, 30 CE, 3 April
33 CE and possibly 11 April 27 CE. 27
Which dates are uncertain and moot anywat because the Jewish people, priesthood and authorities during the Second Temple period used a lunar calendar.
Confirmation
of this by myself using astronomical NASA data 28
revealed that the date of the 14th of Nisan, according to the Julian calendar, may
have fallen on a Thursday night - Friday on 11 April, 27 CE; 7 April 30 CE; and
19 April 37 CE. Now this, of course, is assuming that gJohn is correct about
which day during the Passover season Jesus was supposedly crucified on! If the
synoptics are right, of course, then the 14th of Nisan would have fallen on a Wednesday
night - Thursday! Which yields us the possible dates for the 15th of Nisan occurring
on Friday, 23 April 34 CE. 29
6c-9: Conclusion.
My conclusion as to the date of the alleged crucifixion of the historical Jesus is that it cannot be determined from the Gospels of the New Testament. Sure, they all agree that Pontius Pilate was the prefect, and gLuke and gJohn says Caiaphas was the high priest, but any attempts to be more precise than that gives us dates varying from 28 CE to 37 CE. Trying to confirm a date with astronomical data turns out to be no help in nailing down a precise date.
2.Antiquities 18.2.2 [35] “When Gratus had
done those things, he went back to Rome, after he had tarried in Judea eleven
years, when Pontius Pilate came as his successor.”
3.Antiquities 18.4.2 [89] “Pilate, when he had
tarried ten years in Judea, made haste to Rome, and this in obedience to the
orders of Vitellius, which he durst not contradict”
4.Josephus, Jewish War 2.9.1 [168] and2.9.2 [169]: “But when the Roman Empire was translated to Tiberius…
Herod also built the city of Tiberias in galilee and in Perea [beyond Jordan]
that was called Julias” (Tiberias
was built about 20 CE), “Now Pilate, who was sent as procurator into Judea
by Tiberius, sent by night these images of Caesar that are called effigies,
into Jerusalem.
5.Antiquities 18.2.5 [54] and 18.3.1 [55]: “So
the Senate made a decree… his life was taken by the poison which Piso gave
him…” (the murdered person was Germanicus Caesar, who
was poisoned in 19 CE), “But now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the
army from Caesarea to Jerusalem… in order to abolish the Jewish laws. So he
introduced Caesar’s effigies…”
6.Two scholars who contend a 21 CE
execution date are Daniel Schwarz and Robert Eisler. They
are both cited by Helen K Bond, Pontius
Pilate in History and Interpretation, New York / Cambridge, UK, Cambridge
University Press, 1998, p. 1 n. 3 and p. 201 n. 35. She states that Schwartz,
following Eisler (The
Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist, New York, Lincoln Macveagh The Dial
Press, 1931, pp. 13-20), argues unconvincingly that Pilate took up his
prefecture in 19 CE; and, that the Acta
Pilati, circulated in 311 CE during the principate of Maximin Daia, were not forged by the Roman government and
that they did prove that Jesus was crucified in 21 CE.
7. John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew. Rethinking the Historical Jesus, New York, The Anchor Bible Reference Library, Doubleday, a division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing, 1991, Vol. I, pp 386-401. Note particularly p. 400: "Yet, the obvious promise of the Barabbas narrative -- an amnesty or pardon granted to some Jewish Prisoner at Passover -- is that the amnesty or pardon was given precisely so that the Jew, upon release, could take part in the Passover meal. What would be the point of granting release to a Jewish prisoner on Passover Day after the Passover meal, the central ritual of Passover Day, had already taken place?"
8.The Greek has it: Κατὰ δὲ ἑορτὴν ἀπέλυεν αὐτοῖς ἕνα δέσμιον ὃν παρῃτοῦντο. “Moreover, at the feast, he used to release (ἀπέλυεν) to them whom they requested. The word ἀπέλυεν being the third person singular imperfect indicative active of ἀπολύω, “loose from, undo, set free, release, relieve, send away, let go, [etc.]” So clearly it was Pilate's custom.
9. Josephus; Antiquities 18.3.1-3 [55 - 64], also Samaritans 18.4.1-2 [85 - 89]; Jewish War 2.9.2-4 [169 - 177]. Cf. Philo, Embassy to Gaius 38.299-305, particularly lines 302 and 303 (emphasis mine):
(302) "But this last sentence exasperated him in the greatest possible degree, as he feared least they might in reality go on an embassy to the emperor, and might impeach him with respect to other particulars of his government, in respect of his corruption, and his acts of insolence, and his rapine, and his habit of insulting people, and his cruelty, and his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, and his never ending, and gratuitous, and most grievous inhumanity. (303) Therefore, being exceedingly angry, and being at all times a man of most ferocious passions, he was in great perplexity, neither venturing to take down what he had once set up, nor wishing to do any thing which could be acceptable to his subjects, and at the same time being sufficiently acquainted with the firmness of Tiberius on these points. And those who were in power in our nation, seeing this, and perceiving that he was inclined to change his mind as to what he had done, but that he was not willing to be thought to do so, wrote a most supplicatory letter."
10. Preparation
Day: Παρασκευή
(noun, nominative feminine singular), “preparation, the day of Preparation,
before the Sabbath day of the Passover.”
11. The day before Sabbath: προσάββατον (noun, nominative neuter singular), “the eve of the Sabbath,” i.e., Erev Shabbos.
12. The phrase, “an high day”: μεγάλη ἡ ἡμέρα (adjective / article / noun feminine singular), “great / the / day” or in a more sensible arrangement, “the great day,” i.e., Passover.
13. Et ipse Iesus erat incipiens quasi annorum triginta, “And Jesus himself was beginning [to be] about thirty years [of age].”
14. Καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν Ἰησοῦς ἀρχόμενος ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντα, “And Jesus himself was beginning [to be] about thirty years [old].”
16. Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, Garden City, NY, Doubleday & Co., Inc (1977), pp 256, 547
17. Ibid., p. 166 NOTE Matt. 2:1 in the days of Herod the King: “In 750 A.U.C. (4 B.C.) there was an eclipse [of the moon] on the night of march 12 / 13th, one month before Passover.… the best evidence favors March / April 4 B.C. as the time of Herod’s death.”
20. Josephus, Antiquities 15.11.1 [380], Jewish War 1.21.1 [401].
21. Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, New York, Anchor Bible Reference Library, Doubleday, a division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc., 1994, p. 1374.
22. GJohn 2:13, 2:23 (first Passover); 6:4 (second Passover); 11:55, 12:1, 13:1, 18:28, 18:39 (third Passover).
23. Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, p. 1375.
29. Astronomical dates found by another researcher confirming gJohn’s Day before Passover / Day before the Sabbath crucifixion are: Firday, 22 March, 26 CE; Friday, 7 April, 30 CE; and Friday 3 April 33 CE. He also found the Synoptics’ Day of Passover / Day before the Sabbath crucifixion to be: Friday, 11 April, 27 CE; and Friday 23 April, 34 CE. See the PDF at this link: http://www.biblicaltheology.com/Research/RamsundarP01.pdf.
