Truth Magazine

By Arthur M. Ogden

In December, 1983, newspapers across the country carried an article titled, “Scientists Say They’ve Determined Crucifixion Date.” The article, an Associated Press release datelined London, concerned the findings of two British scientists, Colin J. Humphreys and W.G. Waddington of Oxford University, who “have concluded with ‘reasonable certainty’ that Christ died on Friday, April 3, in the year A.D. 33.” Their findings were published in a December issue of Nature, a British science magazine.

The two British scientists “based their conclusions on astronomical calculations and biblical and historical references” according to the article. The AP release also states, “In the second half of their article, the scientists turn to references in the Bible and in the Apocrypha to the moon being ‘turned to blood,’ saying that ‘in our view the phrase . . . probably refers to a lunar eclipse, in which case the crucifixion can be dated unambiguously.” The two scientists claim that a lunar eclipse was visible at Jerusalem during Passover on Friday, April 3, A.D. 33.

The Traditional View

Many, no doubt, are pleased with these conclusions. The traditional date for Jesus’ death among Christians through the years has corresponded with the 33 A.D. date. We based our conclusions, not on astronomical calculations but, on Scripture. Jesus was about 30 when be began His ministry (Lk. 3:23). His ministry lasted about 3 V2 years. By adding the two together and using the dating system of Dionysius Exiguus (6th century A.D.), we arrived at the date of 33 A.D. Upon the basis of these conclusions we have preached that the church was established in Jerusalem on Pentecost in 33 A.D. and that any spiritual institution founded before that time claiming to be the church of the Lord was too early to be the Lord’s, and any founded after that time was too late to be the Lord’s. Many church buildings built by brethren have cornerstones reading, “Established in Jerusalem, 33 A.D. Established in _______ 18?? A.D.” These conclusions are all sound if Dionysius did not make a mistake.

Men Make Mistakes

Regardless of how scholarly or meticulous man’s efforts, man is still fallible. Dionysius did make a costly mistake! He dated the birth of Jesus four years after the death of Herod the Great during whose reign Jesus was born.(1) By making this mistake, he has rendered his calendar ineffective as a tool in determining the date of Jesus’ death. While this does not mean that Jesus did not die in 33 A.D., it does mean that our method of determining the date is in error.

Men with good intentions often make the mistake of trying to solve biblical problems by scientific methods. Such efforts reflect a tinge of unbelief. Seeking to explain the star of the wise men (Matt. 2:2) by some astronomical phenomenon ignores plain biblical statements and undermines the miraculous witness God gave to His Son’s birth. Explaining the darkness over the face of the earth, when Jesus was crucified (Lk. 23:44), by a solar eclipse denies God His miraculous witness to Jesus’ sonship. Unbelievers hunt for such explanations. Believers accept them without question. Astronomical explanations are neither sought nor needed.

Our two British scientists have fallen prey to this fallacy. They have reached conclusions based in part upon “astronomical calculations.” Supposing that biblical references to the moon “turning to blood” “probably refers to a lunar eclipse,” which they perceive identifies the date of Christ’s death “unambiguously,” they have deducted that Jesus died on April 3, 33 A.D. Their method of calculation demonstrates their ignorance of biblical terminology, its use and application, and their failure to accept by faith the biblical accounts as revealed.

When Was Jesus Crucified?

The exact date of Jesus’ death is not absolutely essential to being a believer, yet to the student of biblical history the date of His death is most helpful. Some historical clues are given which contribute to a definite decision. The Christian can know within reason the date His Savior died for him.

Luke records that John the Baptist began his ministry “in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea” (Lk. 3: 1). Tiberius began his full reign upon the death of Augustus in 14 A.D., and Pilate ruled Judea from 26 to 36 A.D.(2) If Luke’s fifteen years are to be counted from 14 A.D., then 28 or 29 A.D. would correctly identify the beginning of John’s ministry and subsequently that of Jesus. Many think, however, that Luke includes Tiberius’ co-regency with Augustus which began in 11 A.D.(3) If so, 26 A.D. must be accepted as the proper date for the beginning of the ministries of John and Jesus.

John relates that the Jews in rebuttal to Jesus’ statement, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up,” said, “Forty and six years was this temple in building, and will thou rear it up in three days?” (Jn. 2:19-20). Their statement is significant because the temple at that time was still under construction and was not completed until A.D. 64.(4) The temple work was started by Herod the Great in the eighteenth year of his reign,(5) or 19 B.C. Counting forty-six years from 19 B.C. brings us to 27 A.D. Jesus was in Jerusalem for the observance of the first Passover of His ministry (27 A.D.) when this discussion took place (Jn. 2:13). It is thought that John records three other Passovers observed by Jesus during His ministry (Jn. 5:1; 6:4; 12: 1). If so, Jesus’ death came in 30 A.D. three years after His first Passover observance.

The most widely accepted date for Jesus’ crucifixion is 30 A.D. Careful students will observe that biblical historians repeatedly refer to this date. Any calculations designed to establish the date of His death must take into account that Jesus came to Bethany six days before Passover (Jn. 12: 1). Passover, which identifies the day the lamb was killed (Mk. 14:1,12; Lk. 22:1,7), came on the 14th day of the first month, Abib or Nisan (Ex. 12:6; Lev. 23:5). The 14th did not come on the same day of the week each year. In the year Jesus was crucified, the 14th came six days after Jesus came to Bethany. This is significant because, if we count those six days from the first day of the week, Passover would come too late in the week to fit the biblical narrative. If we back up, we must back over the Sabbath to Friday to begin our count, otherwise Jesus and many other Jews violated at least the traditional Sabbath observance by making such a long journey on that day. These guidelines establish that in the year our Lord was crucified Passover fell on Thursday.

The 14th Nisan, 30 A.D.

The British scientists, Humphreys and Waddington, concluded that “Jesus died at the same time as the Passover lambs were slain.” It is evident from their article that they understood Jesus died on the 14th Nisan which in 33 A.D. was Friday, April 3rd. They reconstructed the Jewish calendar to that time to arrive at this date.

This author, while appreciating their deduction that Jesus died on the 14th of Nisan as our Passover (1 Cor. 5:7), believes it impossible to reconcile their deduction with John 12: 1. Their findings are interesting, however, because their dates correspond with other dating tables for that time period and contribute to the verification of their accuracy. A reconstructed dating table, which appeared in Christianity Today (March 29, 1974), the results of a computer analysis, corresponds identically with the findings of Humphreys and Waddington. These tables also show that the only year between 27 and 34 A.D. that the 14th Nisan fell on Thursday was in the year 30. A.D. 27 was too early and A.D. 34 too late for the date of the Lord’s death. The 14th Nisan in 30 A . D. corresponds to April 6 according to our calendar. While this does not settle the question of whether Jesus died on Thursday (Nisan 14, April 6) or Friday (Nisan 15, April 7), it does tell us the year of His death – 30 A.D.

Conclusion

Setting dates for biblical events can be a tedious matter. Numerous things must be taken into consideration before reaching valid conclusions, i.e., comparative secular history and other biblical accounts and principles. It is surprising, however, how close one can come to following the many events of Jesus’ personal ministry and those of the early church, even to the days, months and years, by observing the numerous clues written within the revealed accounts. Careful deductions based upon these clues broaden our understanding and expand our learning experiences.

Endnotes

1. I.S.B.E., “Chronology of the New Testament,” Vol. 1, pp. 644B-645.

2. I.S.B.E., “Pontius Pilate,” Vol. IV, p. 2396.

3. I.S.B.E., “Tiberius,” Vol. V, p. 2979.

4. I.S.B.E., “Temple” (Herod’s), Vol. V, p. 2937.

5. Ibid.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 10, pp. 296-297
May 17, 1984

By Shelby C. Smith

Since the sinner is promised salvation upon the conditions of belief and baptism (Mark 16:16), could one who believes only truthfully say he is trusting God? Who is the man who is really trusting God? The man who hears God, believes God, and does what God says to do. Since Jesus tells us one’s soul is worth more than “this whole world” and that there is no profit in gaining the whole world and losing the soul, I am persuaded that there is an extremely hot place prepared in hell for anyone who will teach poor lost sinners, who are hanging by a brittle thread over a “lake of fire and brimstone,” that all they need to do is “trust in Him” and He will save you in a split second of time.

No more dangerous doctrine was ever invented by the devil than the popular doctrine of “faith only.” The radio and TVs are pouring out this dangerous doctrine over the air and, as a result, many are dazed and groggy. If we do not get to them with the gospel, they will go into hell. But be it remembered that Paul referred to the gospel as God’s power unto salvation (Rom. 1: 16). The word translated power is the Greek for dynamite; so the gospel is God’s dynamite, which will shake the soul, break the heart, stir the spirit, destroy the flesh, and set into operation a new creation.

Many preachers think more of the almighty dollar than the almighty God. They seem to think that the gospel is a sort of sleeping powder which deadens pain and starts the sinner on a journey through sort of a fairyland. The apostle Paul wrote to the Gentiles telling them that the Lord Jesus is one day to be revealed from heaven, “In flaming fire taking vengence on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thess. 1:8). Notice, the gospel is to be obeyed as well as believed; those who obey not the gospel will be destroyed in the fires of hell when Jesus returns.

In Romans 6:6-18, we are told that those who have obeyed from the heart are freed from sin and are servants of righteousness. In Hebrews 5:9, we are assured that Christ is the author of eternal salvation “unto all that have obeyed him.” By the spirit of Christ, John declared that all who have their robes washed, “have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city” (Rev. 22:14).

Another group, with their voice full of tears, will tell sinners that all they need to do is fall down on their knees before a radio or TV and ask God to forgive them, and He will do it that very minute. God said He will turn away His ears from hearing, “and their prayers will be an abomination” (Prov. 28:9). What will save them? “The dynamite of the gospel.” They are to believe what the gospel teaches; and faith, repentance, confession, and baptism puts one into Christ and the church. In Acts 2 and Acts 8, they heard the gospel, believed it, and were baptized. In every case of conversion that we have in the book of Acts of the Apostles, they all did the same thing. Not one time did any New Testament preacher tell any alien sinner to pray for salvation, nor did he tell any sinner to only trust Him. So, why not do exactly what people were told to do in the days of the apostles and be saved? Hear the gospel, believe it, confess our faith in Him, repent and be baptized, and the Lord will add you to His church (Acts 2:47).

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 10, p. 293
May 17, 1984

By Tom M. Roberts

One of the biggest “boners” I ever pulled while in a gospel meeting was to forget a dinner engagement. The good sister had gone to a great deal of trouble preparing a meal of outstanding food. Having known my family for a number of years, she had gone to special trouble to prepare just the things she knew we liked. Imagine, if you can, my chagrin when I learned that I had forgotten this appointment and had been somewhere else. This lady had labored over the stove, set a nice table, had everything in preparation and waited … and waited … and waited. We never showed up and didn’t call. It was only later that I learned of my mistake and I am embarrassed about it to this day! She served dinner, but nobody came.

Through this error of mine I have come to appreciate a little more the invitation of the Lord. Jesus illustrated the kingdom invitation by the story of a supper to which nobody came. In Luke 14:15-24 He relates that “a certain man made a great supper, and he bade many: and he sent forth his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready. And they all with one consent began to make excuse . . .”

Without a doubt, it is one of the lowest forms of ingratitude to scorn a dinner invitation. Hospitality, honestly and sincerely extended, is but an extension of the heart of the host. To treat the dinner with disrespect, intentionally, is to treat the host with disrespect. It is an insult to refuse hospitality under these conditions. It does not take one of great wisdom to see this fact, when speaking of earthly things.

The Lord has extended an invitation for all men to sit with him in the kingdom of heaven. Everything is prepared, the table is set, everything is in readiness. God spent centuries in planning the kingdom (church) and brought it into existence by the precious blood of Christ. Has ever an invitation been so valuable? Would you cherish an invitation to sit down at a dinner in the White House with the President? But friend, such a thing pales into insignificance when we consider the invitation of the Creator of the universe to be a part of the kingdom of heaven and receive eternal life. What an invitation!

But just like the story in our scriptural text, people refuse to appreciate the honor of the invitation. Few want to come. While the excuses may vary, the intent is the same – the host (God) is not held in honor and the invitation is scorned. Like Esau of old, people today are profane and willingly exchange the Father’s blessing for a mess of this world’s stew. Everyone has an excuse: “I work too hard,” or “I am too busy,” or “I have other things that I enjoy doing.”

In the Lord’s illustration the man who gave the supper was angry at those who refused his invitation. Why? Because he knew that they were not just refusing a meal but were refusing the host himself. Those invited did not appreciate him, his generosity, his interest on their behalf or anything else he was trying to do. His decision about those who spurned the invitation was “that none of those men that were bidden shall taste of my supper” (v. 24).

Friend, do you spurn the Lord’s invitation to eat at the Lord’s table in His kingdom? Do you treat lightly His entreaty to come and be a part of the great feast for the soul that is planned? Do you think nothing of the preparation of it, the cost of it (the blood of Christ), or the willingness of the Lord to provide for our needs? How many times has someone tried to interest you in the Lord’s kingdom? How many gospel sermons have you heard? How many times have you treated the Lord shamefully in this matter? While we have time and opportunity, the Lord keeps the invitation open. “But it is appointed unto man once to die, and after this the judgment” (Heb. 9:27). Once this opportunity is gone, there will never be another, though eternity’s years roll on. If you miss the opportunity now, you that have been bidden “shall (not) taste of my supper.”

When I made my blunder and missed the invitation of the meal prepared by the good sister to which I referred earlier, I was able to apologize and make amends. She was even gracious enough to fix another meal later and invite us again. But the embarrassment that I felt helped me to realize that God has done infinitely greater in preparing the invitation to the kingdom and I plan to respond. Will you respond to the Lord’s invitation? Or will you make excuses? Your decision will determine where you spend eternity. Will you be one of those who will say throughout eternity, regretfully, “Dinner was served . . . but I didn’t come”?

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 10, p. 295
May 17, 1984

By David McClister

The interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, and its proper application, has become a matter of contention between some brethren. However, those who are interested in the serious exegetical examination of the passage are generally agreed that the correct solution to the contention lies in the proper understanding of the terms used therein. If we can understand the meaning and significance of Paul’s words, we can then understand his thought. What follows is not an attempt to settle once and for all the contention over “the covering question,” nor is it an attempt to give a complete analysis of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16; it is simply an examination of the phrase “praying or prophesying” and its relation to the correct understanding of the passage in question.

In the first place, consider the word and usage of “praying.” In the Greek text of 1 Corinthians 11:4f(1) the word is the present middle participle, nominative singular, of proseuchomai. This word appears in the tragic Agamemnon by Aeschylus (6/5 B.C.), where it means to offer prayers or vows to gods (theois).(2) The philosopher Plato, in his Symposium, used the word of prayer to the sun, or to Helios, the sungod (toi helioi).(3) Throughout the history of proseuchomai it has always been used in a religious context, as evidenced by these and other examples. The idea of praying to a divine being, whether the true God or not, has always been the primary meaning of the word, even through the Koine period. It is, therefore, no surprise that we find this term in the New Testament to be used only of prayer to God, and never of address to a human being. The fact that proseuchomai describes the action of prayer generally, without reference to content or purpose, accounts for its frequent use in Scripture.

Prayer, of course, is the great medium of communication between the Father and His children. The real capacity for prayer does not lie in need, but in a simple outreach on man’s part. The children of God seek Him and tell their Father all things just as any child would wish to talk to his father, whether the reason be supplication for a need, or some other reason. Prayer, therefore, is a very natural part of Christian living. This can be seen even more clearly in Romans 8:26. Whatever interpretation is placed upon this verse, it cannot be denied that the Spirit has some connection with our prayers to God.

Secondly, consider the word, and usage of, “prophesying.” In the Greek text of I Corinthians 11:4f we find the present active participle, nominative singular of propheteuo.

This word is found in a fragment of the writings of the ancient lyricist Pindar (5 B.C.), where it means to be a proclaimer, or speaker, or interpreter, of the gods.(4) The tragedian Euripides (5 B.C.) used the word with the sense of “intermediary.”(5) These facts are in perfect harmony with the known facts about the ancient pagan worship which incorporated oracles and prophets. The oracle would communicate to the prophets, and the prophets would then speak for, proclaim, or interpret the message of the oracle. In the article in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (hereafter TDNT) edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich on the word group prophets (of which propheteuo is a member) it is said concerning the use of that word group in relation to the Greek oracle:

It denotes appointed men and women and their work, which is to declare something whose content is not derived from themselves but from the god who reveals his will at the particular site. This revelation is through direct inspiration or through signs which stand in need of human interpretation.(6)

Please notice that even the pagans connected the ideas of prophecy and inspiration. The two were seen as inseparable concepts.

Not only were the oracles personnel referred to as prophets, but also the poets. I quote again from TDNT:

The Homeric poet-singer feels that in his work he is dependent upon the divine . . . . The gift sought from the Muse is not only a song but also the content of the past which is to be depicted . . . . Continuing this view, but breaking free from the epic of chivalry, Hes.(iod) with a new claim to truth finds the relation of the poet to the Muses in his personal experience of calling by the Muses, who breathe into him the divine voice. On the soil of this tradition Pind.(ar) is the first Gk. poet to use the group prophetes to describe the link with the Muses. He calls himself Pieridon prophatas, ‘the spokesman of the Muses.’ . . . Pind.(ar) takes his description of the poet as prophetes from the Delphic oracle and in Fr. (agment), 150 he defines his relation to the Muse more closely: . . . ‘prophesy, Muse, and I will be thy speaker.’ Here the Muse has the place of the promantis and the poet that of the oracle prophet.(7)

Again, the poets were referred to as prophets because of the link of inspiration from the Muse.

Propheteuo, like many words found in the Greek New Testament, had different significances to different peoples. To the pagan Greeks the word conjured up the image of an oracle prophet who received communications directly from a god. To a Christian reader the word signified one who spoke for God through inspiration. Both concepts are religious in tone, and both involve a divine being communicating to a human being. The important thing to notice is that the word, no matter what age or writer is spoken of, is always used to describe the proclaiming of something received directly from a deity. The Old Testament prophets spoke as mouthpieces for God. Paul preached to this effect in Acts 28:25. The pagan oracle prophets proclaimed that which was “revealed” directly unto them by the oracle. The pagan poets were called prophets because they relied upon the Muses as sources of inspiration for their literature.

The next article will deal with the concept of inspiration as it relates to the work of a prophet.

Endnotes

1. Erwin Nestle, and Kurt Aland, eds., Novum Testamentium Graece, 26th ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelstiftung, 1979), p. 458. It is this Greek text that is implied whenever a reference to the original text of the New Testament is made.

2. Henry George Liddell, and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, with supplement by H.S. Jones (Great Britain: Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 1151.

3. Ibid.

4. Liddell and Scott, p. 1539.

5. Ibid.

6. Gerhard Kittel, and Gerhard Friedrich, eds., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, trans. G.W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1968), VI, 791.

7. G. Kittel, and G. Friedrich, V1, 792.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 10, pp. 294-295
May 17, 1984