This past summer, a number of people from my church went on a tour of Israel. On their return, one of the pastors was marveling at the great distance that Jesus was required to walk on the morning of his crucifixion. Of course, it is not possible to say with total certainty what route He took that morning, but I believe with a little research it is possible to make some fairly good guesses. The relevant passages in Scripture are Matthew 26:17-27:45; Mark 14:12-15:37; Luke 22:7-23:51; and John 13:2-19:38.
The paragraph numbers below correspond to points on the accompanying map.
The Upper Room – The trek, of course, began at the Upper Room. Most of the sites visited can be located today with some degree of confidence. Not so the Upper Room. Church tradition places it at the site of the Church of the Apostles on Mt. Zion, in the southwestern quarter of the city, in an upper story directly above the traditional location of the Tomb of David. I don’t believe that this is the correct location of either shrine. David’s real tomb was probably in a known cave complex on the southeastern slope of the City of David, but the Upper Room could be anywhere in the city. Due to the proximity of the Gihon Spring and given that the host was described as a man carrying a jar of water, some authors tentatively place it on the Ophel, south of the Temple Mount; however, everybody in Jerusalem had to fetch water, and the room was described as “large”, leading me to place it somewhere in the more upscale Upper or Lower City (the Western Hill or the Tyropoeon Valley). After killing the sacrifices on Thursday, Nisan 14 (probably April 4, AD 30), food for the Seder had to be prepared and the Sabbath candles lit before sundown. Then the meal could begin during the twilight period. Most celebrations wrapped up at around midnight and the celebrants went outside, either into the streets or onto the roofs, to join in citywide singing of the Hallel psalms.
The Mount of Olives – After singing the Hallel, Jesus and his party adjourned to the Mount of Olives, presumably leaving the City of David via the Water Gate, above Gihon Spring. There was most likely a switch-back road descending from the gate into the Kidron Valley below, intersecting with a road running along the valley floor. Matthew and Mark describe this stage of the trek similarly: as they arrived at The Mount of Olives, Jesus prophesied that his apostles would lose faith in him that night. He quoted from the apocalyptic 13th chapter of Zechariah which speaks of the End of Days (acharit hyamim). At that time, the people in the Land will be scattered, with 2/3 of them purged and those who remain purified. He then said that after His resurrection He would meet the disciples in Galilee. At this point, we see the exchange with Peter, when his threefold denial is foretold. They then proceeded on to Gethsemane. Luke only says that Jesus told them to pray that they might not be put to the test. He then went “about a stone’s throw away” to pray—presumably the John 17 prayer—and returned to find them sleeping. John’s account is quite different. There is no clear transition from the Upper Room to the Mount of Olives. Chapters 13 through 17 cover in great detail the exhortations and warnings to the disciples, and Jesus’ prayer. Given only this passage, one would conclude that the entire conversation, including the prayer, took place around the Seder table, though that is not actually stated. From this passage it appears that the exchange with Peter occurred near the end of the Seder, in the Upper Room. Conservative hermeneutics, based on examination of ancient literary practices, allows conversations to be paraphrased and chronologies to be out of order, as long as the message is not distorted by doing so, so this part of the conversation could have taken place in either location. Another likely possibility is that Jesus said the same thing twice in order to drive the point home to Peter.
Gethsemane – From the Mount of Olives, the party moved on to the Garden of Gethsemane (Gat-Sh’manim), where Jesus was arrested. Since Gethsemane is an olive grove and olive press on the Mount of Olives, this can of course be interpreted to mean that they simply moved from outside to inside the borders of the grove; however, I have a personal theory based on the passage in John. John records that after the prayer of chapter 17, “He went out with his talmidim (disciples) across the stream that flows in winter through the Vadi (Vale, or Valley) Kidron, to a spot where there was a grove of trees; and He and His talmidim went into it (CJB).” They must at some time have crossed the Brook Kidron, but is this the stream referred to? At that time the Kidron was fed year-round by the seasonally varying Gihon Spring, and by other sources in the mountains to the east and north during the rainy seasons of early and late winter. Since they would have had to cross this stream below Gihon, it would have always held water. I don’t see how it would be described as “the stream that flows in winter.” I am therefore postulating that the stream may have been just a small rill spilling down off of the Mount, to the south of the grove. That would allow the entire conversation of chapters 13 through 17 to have taken place on the Mount close to, but not strictly within, Gethsemane. One possibility is a small stream that separates what we currently think of as the Mount of Olives and the Mount of Offense. In those days these two mountains, along with Mount Scopus to the north were all considered part of the Mount of Olives.
Annas’ House – Only John mentions that after His arrest, Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, father-in-law of the current High Priest. Annas was an extremely wealthy man who, though no longer High Priest, was still perhaps the most powerful man in the city. Annas was probably the inhabitant of a house in the richest part of the city which has been excavated, partially restored and named the “Palatial Mansion.” The arresting party is likely to have taken one of two routes from Gethsemane: I have drawn them retracing Jesus’ earlier steps to the Water Gate, then taking the most direct route to Annas’ house. As an alternative, they could have entered the city on the north side near the present Lions’ Gate, passing between the Pool of Israel and the Bethesda Pools and rounding north of the Antonia Fortress. The second route is longer, the first more tortuous.
Caiaphas’ House – After briefly questioning Jesus, Annas sent Him to Caiaphas. Matthew and Mark say that “The head cohanim (priests) and the whole Sanhedrin” then put Him on trial. Luke says, “Having seized Him, they led Him away and brought him into the house of the cohen hagadol (High Priest).” Caiaphas’ house has been identified by many with an archaeological site in the southwestern portion of the city, near the traditional site of the Upper Room. Many scholars have long assumed that since the Sanhedrin was involved, Jesus must have then been moved to the Chamber of Hewn Stones in the Temple complex, since that was where they normally met until a few years later when they moved into the Royal Porch. This view is not credible, because (a) they were holding an illegal trial at that time of day (before daybreak); (b) the Temple gates were still locked at that time of day; (c) Peter was described as “outside in the courtyard, (of a residence); and (d) the accompanying Roman soldiers had custody and would not have handed him over to the Jews at this time, which would have been necessary since they could not enter the inner courts of the Temple.
The Praetorium – This was Pilate‘s (the governor’s) headquarters. It has been variously identified as (a) the Antonia Fortress; (b) The Hasmonean Palace, near the Palatial Mansion; and (c) Herod the Great’s Palace, at the site of the later Citadel. It is presently believed that (c) is the correct location. Jesus was taken here “early in the morning”, around daybreak, and questioned by Pilate.
Herod Antipas – This son of Herod the Great normally lived in Caesarea Maritima but was visiting Jerusalem for the Passover. When in Jerusalem, he normally lodged in the Hasmonean Palace (see above). Only Luke mentions this side trip. Herod questioned Jesus and sent Him back to Pilate.
The Praetorium again – When Herod sent Jesus back to the Praetorium, Pilate tried unsuccessfully to release him in order to avoid confrontation with the masses of common people. Instead, he was compelled to kill Jesus instead of Barabbas (Bar-Abba). Jesus was led inside, tortured, and prepared for crucifixion.
Golgotha (Gulgolta) and Joseph of Arimathea’s (Yoseph from Ramatayim’s) Tomb – In a previous blog I explained why Gordon’s Golgotha and the Garden Tomb are not possibly where Jesus’ life was temporarily put to an end. Instead, the crucifixion and burial almost certainly occurred at the traditional Christian site inside the Church of the Resurrection.
Recent scholarship recognizes two main possibilities for the site of Jesus’ crucifixion and burial: Gordon’s Calvary and the Garden Tomb; and inside the bounds of the Church of the Resurrection (hereinafter, “the church”). The current scholarly view is that the latter is the correct choice. I am personally 98% sure that the former is not correct and 85% sure that the latter is. Here are some arguments:
Gen. Charles Gordon popularized the notion that the northern site is correct, based not on archaeological evidence but on a strongly anti-Semitic typology which I will describe below. The church location was given official status by Emperor Constantine in the 4th century based on local Christian tradition. An apparently unbroken chain of succession of bishops in Jerusalem, and the importance of the death and burial, make it quite easy for me to believe that the tradition is valid.
In Gordon’s thinking, the skull-shaped outcropping represents the skull of Jesus; the Antonia Ridge, which arcs from northwest to southeast between his Golgotha and the Antonia Fortress outside the northwest corner of the Temple Mount is Jesus’ spine and torso; the Mount itself is the pelvis; the ridge on which the City of David rests represents the legs; and the Siloam pool, the feet. According to this imagery, that made the Jewish Temple an anus!
Gordon, like many people since, was impressed by the skull shape itself. After all, “Golgotha” does translate to “skull hill.” The problem with this is that with 2,000 years of weathering, the probability that the outcropping looked at all the same in Jesus’ day as it does now is virtually zero. The traditional site of Golgotha may be aptly named for either of two reasons: first, another Christian tradition, not so easy to believe, is that the skull of Adam was buried beneath the cross; the more plausible explanation is simply that this was a common execution site.
Both sites are likely execution places in that both are located at rock quarries close to a major road and a populated area. These conditions were ideal for Roman crucifixions, which were designed to be seen and to provide a deterrent to future malfeasance. Additionally, Jewish stoning was done by placing the guilty party at the bottom of a cliff or in a pit and rolling large stones on top of him or her.
Jewish law forbade executions inside the city. It was long thought that because the church location was inside the Third Wall of Jerusalem, it could not be the legitimate site of an execution. Gordon’s Calvary, on the other hand, was about a hundred yards outside the Third Wall, just off the Damascus Road. We now know, however, that the Third Wall was built later during the regency of Herod Agrippa I and later rulers, so both sites were appropriately outside the city at that time.
Both sites meet the criteria of a tomb in a garden located near the execution site. Gordon preferred the tranquil setting of the northern site as compared to the pomp and bustle of the church. This is merely an emotional preference, not any kind of proof, since in Jesus’ day the site of the garden at the church would have been just as tranquil.
Another “proof” used to champion the northern site was the discovery of two early tomb inscriptions found nearby. These have since been discredited.
The most telling argument of all is that it has become apparent from subsequent archaeological studies in Israel that the burial grounds around the church contain Second Temple era tombs, while the Garden Tomb and all those around it are from the Iron Age, in particular around the 7th and 6th centuries BC. Since John’s gospel describes Jesus’ tomb as “new”, it almost certainly wouldn’t have been built to specifications that had gone out of style centuries earlier. Though the two styles were somewhat similar at first glance, they were actually very much different.
I would suggest one more argument of my own to support the church as the authentic burial site: during the Roman period, Emperor Hadrian built a temple to Jupiter, not on the Temple Mount as used to be thought, but in the present Christian Quarter, adjacent to the eventual site of the Church of the Resurrection. Outside his temple, and squarely on top of the traditional site of Jesus’ tomb, he leveled the terrain and erected a statue of Aphrodite! Perhaps this was a response to the Christian traditions. My thinking is that, because the 10th Roman Legion was still quartered in the city, there would still, just a century later, be a great deal of institutional embarrassment over the “losing” of Jesus’ body and the subsequent development of a major and very troublesome new religion around the claims of His resurrection at that spot. I think that the inevitable Roman military traditions alone would constitute a very powerful argument in favor of that location.
I just dug up something that I posted in early June 2014, and took down again when part of it became old news. My original post was in response to an article that was being circulated claiming that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was planning to hand control of the traditional “Upper Room” site of Jesus’ Last Supper, on Mt. Zion, to Pope Francis, presumably so that it could be developed into yet another Catholic shrine. The author of the article was enraged because he viewed the Pope to be the False Prophet of Revelation and “giving him an official seat in this most sacred of places … is the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel.” The question was posed, “Should [the False Prophet] be glorified before the nations on Mount Zion, God’s holy mountain?”
Unfortunately, in my life I have seen no shortage of end-times weirdness, and this certainly qualifies. I would call it “poorly informed pop theology.”
What made me think of this now (April 2023) is that the current Southern Baptist Sunday School quarterly includes several lessons from John’s Gospel covering parts of the Last Supper, and also a back-page map showing the commentator’s interpretation of Jesus’ movements from the Upper Room to the Cross. He shows Jesus’ trek beginning at the traditional site on Mt. Zion. I usually tend to place a lot of stock in early Christian tradition, but I’m very dubious of this one, which I discussed in more detail in my own interpretation (see Jesus’ Last Steps).
The traditional “Upper Room” This is a 12th Century Crusader structure, image downloaded from Vintage Grace, constancedenninger.blogspot.com.
Honestly, I can’t really recall much detail from the article I was responding to, and the link to it is now broken, no doubt because the particular “abomination” it warned of never happened. I am now reposting an updated version of my response, simply because there are still points to be made about the Upper Room, and Eschatology in general. For perspective, I am Premillennial, and my views presuppose a pre-Tribulation Rapture of the Church.
The Abomination of Desolation will be a desecration of the Holy of Holies in the Tribulation Temple; not of the Upper Room, as stated in the article. The majority of today’s Christians belong to denominations that are either Catholic, Orthodox, or Reformed, and most of those teach that God has permanently turned His back on the Hebrew people. This is a characteristic of Covenant Theology in general, which I suspect is the reason the article elevates the Upper Room in significance, at the expense of the Jewish Temple.
Any suggestion that the prophesied Abomination would pertain to any strictly Christian holy site, like the Upper Room, is bogus. The end-time prophesies, and the Tribulation itself, are related wholly to Israel and to Gentile nations, not to the Church and New Testament Christianity. By the time of the Abomination, the Church will have been Raptured. Any believers present on earth as the Tribulation period advances will be worshiping in a totally Jewish context.
The Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel, Jesus, Paul—and of course John in Revelation—referred to end-time events. It was prefigured during Intertestamental times by a similar Abomination perpetrated by the Syrian king Antiochus IV. It is not uncommon in history to see prophesied events prefigured by earlier events. Prefiguration is illustration. Because Antiochus defiled the Most Holy Place in the Jerusalem Temple, we are strengthened in our understanding that it will be the Most Holy Place in the Jerusalem Temple that Antichrist will defile.
To state it again, the Abomination will be perpetrated by Antichrist—not the False Prophet. Messiah ritually cleansed the Temple when He drove out the moneychangers. Antimessiah will defile it.
The Upper Room shrine is one of the most poorly attested of the ancient holy sites. The room shown in the photo above is Byzantine, and the most that can be said about it is that it may be built on or near the original site of the actual Upper Room. Even more dubiously, the ground floor of the same building is also said to sit on the tomb of King David. This is way, way down the scale of likelihood!
Mt Zion, where the shrine is located, is not even “God’s holy mountain” at all! In Bible times, “Mt. Zion” referred to Mt. Moriah, where the First and Second Temples stood and where previously God directed Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. All Biblical references to Zion refer to Mt. Moriah. In Byzantine times, probably due to confusion, the name “Zion” became connected instead to the “Western Hill” area (the Upper City) between the Tyropoeon Valley and the Hinnom Valley. This area, as well as the Bezetha Hills to the north, were first built up by King Hezekiah, in order to accommodate a huge immigrant population from the region of Samaria.
Before I leave that subject, the so-called “Ten Lost Tribes” were never totally lost. After the conquest of the Northern tribes by Assyria, hordes of upper- and middle-class Jews were exiled to other Assyrian conquests. Many peasants were left behind to share the land with conquered peoples from elsewhere that were resettled there. Many of those intermarried to produce the mamser (“bastard”) Samaritan population later despised in Judea. But shortly before the Assyrian conquest, many well-to-do northerners fled to Judea. The size of Jerusalem doubled as a result of that influx. In the First Century, this region was populated largely by aristocratic Sadducees and Roman officials—hardly a holy mountain!
Contrary to the famous, controversial claim by the late Jerry Falwell, Antichrist will not be Jewish, in my understanding—but the False Prophet will be. I base this on my strong belief that in prophecy, “the sea” usually, if not always, refers to the masses of non-Jewish people surrounding the Holy lands, and “the Land” refers to the lands given by God to His people. Antichrist is “the beast from the sea”, and the False Prophet is “the beast from the land.” To my knowledge, no Pope has ever been Jewish!
Reading in the Pope as the False Prophet, I’m sure, comes easily because Premillennialists have long assumed that the “Great Whore” of Revelation is the Catholic Church, or some form of apostate Christianity. Catholicism seems to fit the metaphor because to Protestants it incorporates many syncretistic rituals and beliefs. On the other hand, history now suggests another possible identity of the Harlot of Revelation: Islam. Militant Islam is a whorish religion in that it insists on an illicit union between false religion and the state, and I believe it to now be a far more powerful entity than Catholicism or the apostate Church.
That is not to suggest that the False Prophet will be a Muslim. Early in his regime, Antichrist will cozy up to all religions, but his own religion, and later the only one allowed, will be worship of him. The False Prophet will ultimately be a prophet of only that one religion, which will probably have little or no liturgy or theology. He will be more of a chief of staff or press secretary by then.
Finally, I am puzzled by the outrage in the article. Surely God’s plan is the best plan! Why not say, with the Apostle John,
[20] He which testifieth these things saith, “Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.” —Revelation 22:20 (KJV)
The term “atonement” is used over and over in the Old Testament to describe the purpose for and result of the Sinaitic (or Mosaic) sacrificial system. Many Christian theologians extrapolate the Old Testament concept into the New Testament setting and speak of the “atoning work of Christ on the cross.” This usage, however, obscures the very real difference between Old Testament atonement and New Testament expiation, propitiation and reconciliation. Atonement, in the Biblical sense, is a temporary covering up of sin, or guilt. A “stay of execution”, so to speak. Expiation means “to extinguish guilt incurred.” Propitiation is roughly the same, but with the additional dimension of appeasement of anger. Reconciliation means to “reestablish a close relationship” between two entities or concepts. Expiation and propitiation accurately describe what the death of Messiah did, while reconciliation, an accounting term, describes the result: our relationship with God is brought into balance. Cause and effect. Sin is paid for in full and permanently expunged from the record, God is appeased, and our relationship with Him is restored.
The Hebrew terms for “atonement” are variations from the root kaphar, which all carry the idea of “covering”; for example, covering a ship’s hull with bitumen to prevent leakage, or covering a stain in a hardwood floor with a rug. Orthodox Jewish males today cover their heads with kippot, the skullcaps or yarmulkes (Yiddish) that we have all seen. The “lid” of the Arc of the Covenant was called the kapporah, and it, too, is a covering. Atonement for sin, then, becomes a means of covering, or obscuring, it from sight, without actually expunging or removing it. The guilt remains, but God has provided a means of temporarily “sweeping it under the rug” pending permanent expungement by means of Messiah’s crucifixion.
Aside from references to the Jewish feast, the Day of Atonement, the words atone, or atonement appear seldom or not at all in most translations of the New Testament. In the Septuagint (LXX, the Greek translation of the Old Testament used by Paul, translated, apparently, by 70 Jewish scholars in Elephantine, Egypt in the 2nd Century, BC), the word “atonement” is rendered as hilasterion, because there apparently was not a Greek equivalent for “atonement”. Where the feast day is intended, the Greek hilasterion is thus also used in the New Testament for “atonement”, or even for “Mercy Seat”, referring to the covering of the Ark of the Covenant; otherwise, hilasterion is correctly translated as expiation or propitiation. Where the Greek katallagē is used, the proper translation is reconciliation.
Though most New Testament translations are generally okay in this respect, Christian writers and speakers continue to refer to phrases like, “the atoning blood of Christ”, which is a theological non-sequitur. Atonement is decidedly not what His crucifixion accomplished! The confusion arises because most Christians believe that the sacrifices were means of salvation under the Jewish Torah. But this is taught nowhere in scripture. Atonement by means of the sacrificial system is never said to make anybody “at one with Christ” or with God. Atonement is not “at-one-ment” as many have claimed. Salvation is permanent, whereas atonement is only temporary.
In discussing the superior sacrifice of Jesus, Heb 10:4 states that
Hebrews 10:4 (CJB) [4] …it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins.
Many passages in the Tanach (Old Testament) also discuss the inadequacy of sacrifice in the presence of a sinful heart. For example
1 Samuel 15:22 (CJB) [22] Sh’mu’el [Samuel]said, “Does ADONAI take as much pleasure in burnt offerings and sacrifices as in obeying what ADONAI says? Surely obeying is better than sacrifice, and heeding orders than the fat of rams.
Psalms 40:7 (CJB) 7 Sacrifices and grain offerings you don’t want; burnt offerings and sin offerings you don’t demand. Instead, you have given me open ears;
Psalms 51:18 (CJB) 18 For you don’t want sacrifices, or I would give them; you don’t take pleasure in burnt offerings.
Proverbs 15:8 (CJB) [8] ADONAI detests the sacrifices of the wicked but delights in the prayers of the upright.
Isaiah 1:11 (CJB) [11] “Why are all those sacrifices offered to me?” asks ADONAI. “I’m fed up with burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fattened animals! I get no pleasure from the blood of bulls, lambs and goats!
Jeremiah 6:20 (CJB) [20] What do I care about incense from Sh’va [Sheba] or sweet cane from a distant land? Your burnt offerings are unacceptable, your sacrifices don’t please me.”
Hosea 6:6 (CJB) [6] For what I desire is mercy, not sacrifices, knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
Hosea 8:13 (CJB) [13] They offer me sacrifices of flesh and eat them, but ADONAI does not accept them. Now he will recall their crimes and punish their sins— they will return to Egypt.
Hosea 9:4 (CJB) [4] They will not pour out wine offerings to ADONAI; they will not be pleasing to him. Their sacrifices will be for them like mourners’ food— everyone eating it will be polluted. For their food will be merely to satisfy their appetite; it will not come into the house of ADONAI.
Why did God not want the sacrifices that He, Himself, had demanded? Just as we believe that baptism and the Lord’s Supper are a response of obedienceby someone already saved, and useless to the unsaved, so were the sacrifices a response of obedience. Salvation then, as now, was “by grace through faith.” Sacrifice had no efficacy except to those who were already the recipients of God’s saving grace. The purpose of the sacrifices was to ritually “cover”, or hide from God’s eyes, the guilt of the sinner who, by his obedient sacrifice, was “making amends.”
But notice this:
Every single one of the atoning sacrifices was for incidental, or unintentional, sin; in other words, for sins committed in ignorance, accidentally, or under duress. There was absolutely no means of sacrificial atonement for willful sin—except for God’s grace! On Yom Kippur, the “Day of Atonement” the Cohen HaGadol (high priest) would sacrifice a bull for his own incidental sin and a goat for the incidental sin of the people. Once the problem of incidental sin had been covered up, he would then lay his hands on the forehead of another goat, the scapegoat, symbolically transferring to it all further, willful, sin. The scapegoat would be led “outside the camp”, i.e., away from the people and out of God’s presence. Thus, the nation’s sin was allegorically returned to Azazel, the chief of demons.
This post was first published over 10 years ago but recently got a major overhaul. First, because my own style has changed a bit over the years; but also, because I’ve changed my mind about one related issue, which I’ll discuss below. This is a good time for an update because it is now the middle of the Hebrew month Elul, and that is the temporal setting of my main topic here, the Fall Feasts.
I started this edit by setting a time frame for Jesus’ First Advent, which I date in the following short table. Here I have used the Gregorian calendar for the year, because that is more identifiable to most of us, but I’m taking the month and day from the Hebrew calendar, because annual events are Biblically fixed according to that standard and are different every year by the Gregorian and earlier Julian calendars.
Event
Age
Hebrew Date
Gregorian Year
Birth
–
Tishri 15
4 BC
Baptism
about 30 years
Elul 1
AD 26
Crucifixion
about 33 yrs., 6 mos.
Nisan 14
AD 30
Here are some of the factors I considered in composing this table:
The Biblical feast days commemorate important Jewish historical events, celebrate the annual agricultural cycle, and prophesy about Messiah’s life on earth, in both of His advents.
I am convinced that the Jewish principal feasts, as commanded in Leviticus 23, provide a totally reliable outline of important events in Jesus’ life, as shown in the last column of Figure 1, above. Events highlighted there in peach occurred during His first advent, on the actual feast days shown. Events highlighted in blue will occur during His second advent, again on the actual feast days shown.
I’m very confident that Jesus’ birth was on Tishri 15, the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles, Sukkoth. Not in December, on a date with absolutely no Scriptural support (but with a pagan connotation!); but rather in a September/October timeframe corresponding to Jewish celebration of the time that God previously “tabernacled” with His people during their 40 years of wilderness wandering. With Jesus’ birth, once again God was living among His people.
The year of Jesus’ birth has been disputed during my entire lifetime. There are always unresolved arguments about when Herod died, when Quirinus was governor of Cilicia/Syria, and what year a lunar eclipse hit the region, all of which are applicable. The most commonly cited estimates that I’ve seen place Jesus’ birth in 4 BC, though dates ranging from 1 through 6 BC are also commonly mentioned. I’m sticking with 4 BC here, because it fits well with the other two dates in my table.
Luke 3:23 states that Jesus was “about thirty years of age” when He began His ministry. Fall of AD 26 is about thirty years after the autumn of 4 BC. In fact, if His ministry began on Yom Kippur (see below), and that was the last day of His 40-day “wilderness fast and temptation”, then He was just five days shy of 30 years old.
His baptism by John was 40 days before Tishri 10, which is the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur. I’ll explain the 40-day offset below, but it culminates with Jesus on the pinnacle of the Temple, defying Satan, on Yom Kippur, in full view of many thousands of worshippers on the plaza below.
Fig. 2: The late Alec Garrard, facing “south”, posing in his backyard shed model of Herod’s Temple. The parapet in the lower right corner overlooks the Kidron Valley, and as the highest point on the Temple Mount walls, it is thought by many to be the “pinnacle” mentioned in Scripture. I personally suspect that the somewhat lower parapet to the left, more commonly known as the Place of Trumpeting, might be the actual pinnacle of Scripture, since it is far more visible from the streets below. Photo from The Miniature Engineering Craftsmanship Museum.
His crucifixion was on Nisan 15, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, Yom ha-Bikkurim, not on Nisan 14, the day of the sacrifices.
The year of Jesus’ crucifixion, shown here as AD 30, was calculated by me, using NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association) New Moon Tables, which were prepared with historic ocean tides in mind. Every published Biblical chronology that I’m aware of puts the crucifixion in AD 33, but they are all based on an incorrect interpretation that insists He was crucified on Nisan 14. With a correct understanding of the timings of Passover Week which (thanks to my traditional presuppositions) it frankly took me many years to achieve, it is clear that Jesus was crucified on Nisan 15.
9/5/2023 addition – When I was working on my August update last week, I completely forgot to add one other crucial piece of evidence:
1 In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, 2 during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. —Luke 3:1-2 ESV
Leaving Tiberias until last, here are the tenure years of the leaders mentioned (all are 1st Century AD): Pilate, 26–36; Herod (Antipas), 4–39; Philip, 4–34; Lysanius, unknown; and Caiaphas, 18–37. Annas was High Priest during the period 6–15 but was the real power in the Temple during the tenure of Caiaphas, his son-in-law, 18–37.
For the purpose of dating the text, only Tiberias‘ rule is useful. Many historians and Biblical commentators date Tiberias’ accession to the time of Augustus’ death. That puts the timing of Jesus’ baptism in the year AD 29, which would pose a problem for my proposed dating. I don’t think AD 29 is correct, because it was common for many, possibly most, ancient rulers and their chroniclers to ambitiously include years of coregency in citing tenure of rule. Tiberias was coregent with Augustus starting in either AD 11 or 12. AD 11 fits perfectly with my AD 26 date for Jesus’ baptism.
I find that I am not alone in recognizing this discrepancy. The well-respected commentary Jamieson, Faucett & Brown, for example, states that:
the fifteenth year of Tiberius — reckoning from the period when he was admitted, three years before Augustus’ death, to a share of the empire [results in a date for the events of Matthew 3:1 of] about the end of the year of Rome 779, or about four years before the usual reckoning.
“The usual reckoning” is AD 30. The traditional date for the founding of Rome was 753 BC, which makes “the year of Rome 779” equivalent to AD 26.
Please refer to Figures 3 and 4, above. The Passover sacrifices were killed on Nisan 14, then consumed during the Seder, which began that evening at dusk. Jesus and His 12 apostles celebrated the Seder until late, as customary, then joined with the Hallel singing outside at midnight, and afterwards walked to Gethsemane, where Jesus was arrested. His trials were conducted during the early morning of Nisan 15, and He was crucified and buried that day. That was on a Friday, and the only year within a reasonable range with a Friday on Nisan 15 was AD 30. I am very confident that this scenario is correct!
Fig. 5: An April 2024 calendar showing parallel Hebrew dates on the right. This clearly demonstrates that the 8-day Passover celebration (7 days in Israel) begins on Nisan 15. Jewish Time®, by Calendar Maven
Most scholars think that Jesus’ ministry lasted around 3½ years, based on the number of Passovers He seems to have attended during that time. I agree.
This month shall be to you the head of the months; to you it shall be the first of the months of the year. —Exodus 12:2 (The Complete Jewish Tanach)
Nisan 1, in the Spring, is the Jewish religious New Year. Jews today, though, celebrate the civil new year, Rosh Hashanah, which is six months later, on Tishri 1.
Most of the modern world celebrates the new year with revelry. Not so among devout Jews in 1st Century Judea, because Tishri 1 is also the date of Yom Teruah, the Day of Trumpets. This important feast day heralds God’s judgment of His chosen people for their deeds, both good and bad, committed during the preceding year.
As such, the mood during the entire ten-day period through Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, on Tishri 10, is somber and introspective. There is prayer, fasting, ritual immersion (baptism for purification), and general spiritual misery and mourning. No weddings or other celebrations are permitted.
Once Yom Kippur has passed, the mood shifts. There is spiritual relief, and a 5-day period of relaxed preparation, followed by the joyous eight-day celebration of Sukkoth, the Feast of Tabernacles.
In the rest of this post, I will concentrate on two of the fall feasts in particular: The Day of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement. These two feasts, and the 10-day span of time connecting them, is known as Yamim Noraim, the ten “Days of Awe”. This somber period, as described above, is devoted to sincere individual and national confession of sins, and to t’shuvah, or repentance.
Rosh Hashanah, also known as Yom Teruah (The Day of Trumpets), is the Jewish day for regathering. Jews believed that, on this day every year, God divided His people into three groups according to their faithfulness over the preceding year. One group was the “wholly righteous”, whose names would certainly be written in the Book of Life. A second group was the “wholly wicked”, who would be written into the Book of Death. The final group was comprised of “those in between”, whose fate would be sealed by the quality of their t’shuvah over the next ten days, with their final judgment reserved until Yom Kippur.
What prompted me to revise this post was that, in the original version, I said of the above viewpoint, “this doctrine is certainly not Biblical”; however, I have mostly changed my mind about the books, though I think that the Jewish perspective on them may be a bit skewed. I have recently been introduced to the works of Michael S. Heiser, and what he called the “Deuteronomy 32 worldview” (see Gods and Demons). He addressed this subject in ways that I had not previously considered.
There are, in fact, eight New Testament references, mostly in Revelation, to the “book of life“, and many Old Testament and intertestamental references to heavenly “books” and “tablets” that are clearly connected. I assume that these conceptual records are metaphorical, considering that God is God, and doesn’t need a physical database to remember what He needs to remember. Heiser makes sense when he suggests that our sins are recorded in one book, and our salvation in another. If (and only if) we are not listed in the second, then we will be judged by what is recorded in the first. There may be a “book of death“, too, that renders some ineligible for salvation. Regarding the latter, see, for example:
[31] Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. —Matthew 12:31 (ESV)
Whether or not the doctrine of these books is valid, the fact that the holiday recognizes a separation of people from people is very significant since it prophetically depicts the regathering of God’s people on the coming day of Rapture:
[16] For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first… —1 Thessalonians 4:16 (KJV)
In light of 1 Thes 4:16, the blowing of the trumpet (actually, a shofar, or ram’s horn) on Yom Teruah is particularly interesting. The shofar (accompanied by metallic trumpets in Temple days) was blown at mid-morning after the morning (Shacharit) prayers, in three series of four distinctive notes: tekia (“blast”); shevarim (“broken notes”); teruah (“shout”—thought of as “the shout of an archangel”); and tekia gedolah (the “great blast”). The first series is tekia, shevarim, teruah, tekia, repeated three times. The second is tekia, shevarim, tekia, repeated three times. The final series is tekia, teruah, tekia, repeated three times, followed immediately by tekia gedolah, referred to in 1 Cor 15:52 as “the last trumpet”.
[52] in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. —1 Corinthians 15:52 (ESV) emphasis mine
Since long before Jesus’ day, the Days of Awe have, in practice, begun thirty days beforeYom Teruah, on the first day of the Jewish month Elul. T’shuvah (repentance) is much too important to put off until the last minute, so the Rabbis decided that forty full days should be devoted to it, rather than the ten required by Torah.
On Elul 1, Jews would flock to the mikvot (baptisteries) of the Temple and synagogues, and to the “living waters” of streams and rivers like the Yarden (Jordan), to immerse themselves for ritual purification. That would then be followed by forty days of prayer, fasting and introspection. In the years preceding AD 30, it seems that many had become preoccupied with the politics and woes of the Roman occupation, and such customs were being neglected. Into this scene stepped Yochanan, who we now call John the Baptizer, calling Jews to baptism and t’shuvah.
[13] Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. [14] John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” [15] But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. [16] And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; [17] and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” —Matthew 3:13–17 (ESV)
I believe that the events of Mt 3:13-17, describing Jesus’ baptism and anointing by the Holy Spirit, took place on Elul 1, conforming to the current tradition. As to the year, I lean towards AD 26, as stated above. If that year is off, I’m still 100 percent sure of the Hebrew month and day.
Fig. 8: The Jordan River today, due east of Jerico. Scripture places Jesus’ baptism at Bethany on Jordan, no doubt referring to the east bank of the oxbow, close to the village. From Google Earth.
Though of course He was sinless, His baptism, followed by forty days of prayer and fasting, were consistent with and required by the customs of the season.
More importantly, the temptation and His response were theologically vital. Jesus was “the Second Adam” (see The Two Adams). The first was created sinless, but when tempted by the “lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life”, failed and brought sin to the world. The same tempter and same temptations came to Jesus in the wilderness: lust of the flesh (stones to bread); lust of the eyes (the kingdoms of the world); and pride of life (rescue by angels in the sight of all Israel). Jesus did not fail, and brought redemption to the world.
Matthew presents a different order for the temptation, which is not a problem because chronological order was not strictly important in the literature of the day, but I’m certain that “pride” was last in real time, as listed by Luke.
Interestingly, that placed Jesus on the Pinnacle of the Temple on Yom Kippur:
[9] Then he [the devil] took him to Yerushalayim, set him on the highest point [Greek pterugion, literally, a “wing” or “turret”] of the Temple and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, jump from here! [10] For the Tanakh [Old Testament] says [Psalm 91:11–12],
‘He will order his angels to be responsible for you and to protect you. [11] They will support you with their hands, so that you will not hurt your feet on the stones.’”
[12] Yeshua [Jesus] answered him, “It also says, ‘Do not put ADONAI your God to the test.’” [13] When the Adversary [Greek diabolos, literally, “accuser”] had ended all his testings, he let him alone until an opportune time. —Luke 4:9–13 (CJB)
While the Temple still stood, on Yom Kippurall the people gathered on the Temple Mount for the ritual sacrifices that would roll the sins of the truly repentant back for another year. Since there is no longer a Temple, and thus no legitimate place for blood sacrifices, the gatherings are now in the synagogues, and what is offered are “sacrifices of prayer.”
Most translations render pterugion as “pinnacle”, following the KJV. This is traditionally interpreted as the highest point on the Temple Mount or its surrounding walls, but I don’t think that this is warranted. It seems to me most likely that this is referring to the “place of trumpeting” (see Figure 2) which, by inference, was probably the parapet, or observation platform, from which the priests monitored the ritually vital sunrise and sunset every day. This high overlook was visible from the exterior streets below. If Jesus had accepted Satan’s temptation to throw Himself off and allow the angels to catch Him, all the Jewish world would have witnessed the destruction of His public ministry on the very day it began! Certainly, this was Satan’s plan!
I am forever thrilled at the beauty of God’s timing! I believe that many of the events connected with Jesus’ First and Second Advents actually occurred or will occur on the precise day of the Feast that pictures the event. Could it be that He will return for his Church at the exact moment of the “Last Trump” on the Feast of Trumpets (as God indeed said He would!), which is prophetic of the Rapture? Is it possible that He will return in judgment at the end of Tribulation on the Day of Atonement, the very day when God is thought to seal His judgment of His people? I am convinced it is so!
The Back of My Mind 