Talk:Missing years (Jewish calendar)

message: Added a section about Lerman's theory. Goeie 04:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lerman's Theory 

message: I am placing this here till I can see how best to incorporate it into the article.
"One version of the argument states that the Jews deliberately distorted the dating to hide that the prophecy refers to Jesus"
It can be found in Chapter 9 of the "Treatise of Redemption" (pg 322 of the Yale English Edition). R'Saadia Gaon in his critique of the Christian interpretation of some passages in Daniel, makes the claim that the Christians intentionally altered the calendar so that the dates of their view of redemption would coincide with their understanding of scripture. R'Saadia Gaon makes the accusation that they intentionally added dynasties to their list of kings to achieve this effect (the opposite of the views championed by the article in Hakira and R'Shimon Shwab). Here is the quote in full:
However the clearest [refutation of all lies in the fact that from the time when this revelation was made to Daniel until the date which they believe [to have been the time of the fulfillment of the prophecies regarding the redemption], only 285 years had elapsed. Now the total sum [mentioned in the book of Daniel] is 490 years. Of this number of year 70 were taken up by the period preceding the building of the second temple, and 420 by that of its existence.
I have found, then, that the advocates [of the Christian doctrine] had no other means [of supporting their theory] except the contention that an addition is to be made in the chronological calculation. They maintain, namely, that the government of the Persian over Palestine existed for a period of something like 300 years before that of the Greeks and that the number of their kings during this period was seventeen. However, I have refuted this contention on their part from the text of the book of Daniel itself, [pointing out] that it was impossible that between the time of the government of Babylon and that of the Greeks more than four Persian kings should have rules over Palestine. For the angle said to Daniel, peace be upon him: And as for me, in the first years of Darius the Mede, I stood up to be a supporter and a stronghold unto him. And now, I will declare unto thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all; and when he is waxed strong through his riches, he shall stir up against the real of Greece (Daniel 11:1,2). The above statement has thus been explained from every aspect.
These are, then, the arguments that may be offered in refutation of the doctrine of the Christians aside from the objections to be raised against their theory of the suspension of the laws of the Torah and those that might be urged against them on the subject of the Unity of God, and other matters, which cannot properly be presented in this book. 
Wolf2191 03:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Saadiah

message: I have recently reverted the reverts of a change that I made to the article, since it previously looked as though the "missing years" were the period between the destruction of the first temple and the second. On the contrary, the "missing years" denote the length of time between different datings of the first temple's destruction, one of which is determined in accordance with Babylonian and archaeological sources, the other by working backwards from the date of the second temple's destruction in accordance with an interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27. Archaeological sources tell us that the first temple was destroyed c.587 BCE, while the rabbinic dating sets it at c.423 BCE. The period between those two dates is one of about 164 years, which are described as "the missing years". The length of time between those dates and the date of the destruction of the second temple is not "missing". --Aniboker (talk) 01:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The missing years are an artifact caused by a disagreement about the length of time between the destruction of the First Temple and the destruction of the Second Temple.  - Lisa (talk - contribs) 20:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

text: That may indeed be what gave rise to the two different dates for the first temple's destruction, but the years that are "missing" are the ones between those two dates (587 BCE and 423 BCE). I suspect we might be saying the same thing, but the way it was worded before made it look as though the missing years were the ones between 587/423 BCE and 69 CE. --Aniboker (talk) 05:06, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which years are "missing"? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Missing years (Jewish calendar). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141030154541/https://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/me/c/cuneiform_nebuchadnezzar_ii.aspx to https://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/me/c/cuneiform_nebuchadnezzar_ii.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060102222610/http://www.jewishamerica.com/ja/timeline/adm2abr.cfm to http://www.jewishamerica.com/ja/timeline/adm2abr.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:28, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi,
just a minor comment from a layperson on the topic who just wandered in onto this page: What is the " R' " placed before the names of (what I assume are) Jewish scholars in the last section of the article? I assume it's some honorific specific to Jewish scholarship (possibly short for "Rabbi"?), but I've never seen it before and I think it's obscure enough (to non-Jews, anyway) that it merits some sort of explanation. If a page for it doesn't exist, maybe just a footnote or, if an abbreviation of a longer title, have it spelt out on §first use?
Thanks,
Mike
46.135.8.92 (talk) 00:25, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "R" stands for "Rabbi."Davidbena (talk) 11:45, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor question: What is the "R' " before scholar names? 

message: First, User:Editor2020 and Special:Contributions/Ar2332, I appreciate your edits on this page. You seem to be making some headway and sense out of it all, as the matter was confusing to our ordinary readers. I commend you on your patience and hard work, to make this subject a little easier for our readers. Jewish chronology, as you know, is a very complex subject owing to its divergent views and opinions.
The Seder Olam (chapter 30) claims that the Second Temple stood 420 years. This opinion is supported by the Tosefta (Zevahim 13:6) and by the Talmud itself (Jerusalem Talmud, Megillah 18a; Babylonian Talmud, Megillah 11b-12a; Arakhin 12b; Baba Bathra 4a). In the Talmud (Avodah Zarah 8b–9a) and Seder Olam (ibid.), this time-frame of 420 years is divided up between the several hegemonic powers, which years are as follows (from destruction in 68 CE and thence working backwards in time): 
:103 years (35 BCE–68 CE) = Herod's Dynasty.
:103 years (138 BCE–35 BCE) = Hasmonean Dynasty.
:180 years (318 BCE–138 BCE) = Grecian hegemony over Israel (Talmud: "wicked kingdom over Israel").
:(The Talmud adds in Avodah Zarah 8b [end]–9a that the Grecians lived peaceably with Israel 26 years prior to this time, meaning, in 344 BCE)
:34 years (352 BCE–318 BCE) = Persian hegemony, referring only to the time that they exercised dominion over Israel during the time when the Second Temple stood, after which their dominion over Israel was taken away from them by the Grecians, when Alexander the Great came to power.
:Total: 420 years
Please note that the 2nd century Jewish chronicler wrote in Seder Olam Rabbah (chapter 30): "Rabbi Yose says: The kingdom of Persia during the time of the Temple lasted [only] 34 years." Many have misconstrued these words to mean that the author of Seder Olam Rabbah has contracted the entire Persian period of over 200 years into a supposed period of 34 years. According to RASHI,RASHI's commentary on the Babylonian Talmud (Avodah Zarah 9a, s.v. מלכות פרס בפני הבית) the 34-year Persian period must be understood in the context of their hegemony over Israel while the Second Temple stood. Meaning, 34 years is the precise time-frame between the building of the Second Temple under Darius (I) in 352 BCE (according to Jewish calculations) and Alexander the Great's rise to power in 318 BCE – collected altogether as 34 years of Persian hegemony over Israel while the Temple stood. This time-frame, therefore, does not signify the end of the dynasties in Persia, but rather of their rule and hegemony over Israel before Alexander the Great rose to power.
 
Talmudic exegete, Rabbeinu Chananel, knowing when the Seleucid era commenced, wrote there in his commentary on the Talmudic passage (Avodah Zarah 10a) that Alexander the Great rose to power in 318 BCE, six years before the people began to make use of the Seleucid era counting in 312/11 BCE. It is agreed by all that the Seleucid era counting began in 312/11 BCE. It follows that Rabbeinu Chananel's opinion on Alexander the Great and his reign is merely a reflection of the book, Seder Olam.
Josephus, however, had a different tradition, writing in his work Against Apion 1.22 that Alexander the Great died in the 114th Olympiad, after reigning 12 years. Note that the 114th Olympiad would have corresponded with about 326 BCE, or what was then 15 years before they began to make use of the Seleucid era counting! In fact, most of the chronological dates brought down by Josephus will NOT align with Seder Olam, the book on which rabbinic tradition is so dependent. Here are a few of the more salient examples of where Josephus has carried on a separate tradition of his own, supported in part by the First Book of Maccabees. The dates here appended were written by Josephus in either the Olympiad era counting or the Seleucid era counting, or both. Often, he brings down the number of years that have transpired from a certain date, which also helps us pinpoint this time-frame, and can be used here on Wikipedia, in accordance with WP:CALC.
:Josephus' Timeline of Events
* Josephus, Against Apion 1.22.
* Josephus, Antiquities 12.5.3. (12.246). Josephus takes his dates from I Maccabees.Titus Flavius Josephus, Delphi Complete Works of Josephus (Illustrated), Chapter 3
* Josephus, Antiquities 12.5.4. (12.248). This is one of the rare instances where Josephus aligns the Seleucid era date with the date of the Olympiad. Josephus takes his dates from I Maccabees.  
* , and the 4th year of the 154th OlympiadJosephus, Antiquities 12.7.6 (12.316). This is one of the rare instances where Josephus aligns the Seleucid era date with the date of the Olympiad. Josephus has taken the Seleucid era date of this event from I Maccabees 4:52, although the Olympiad era date does not appear in I Maccabees.
* Josephus, Antiquities 12.9.2 (12.360)
* Josephus, Antiquities 12.9.3 (12.362), and which source is taken from I Maccabees VI. 49, 53
* Josephus, Antiquities 13.6.7. (13.213); The Jewish War 1.2.2 (1.50)
* Josephus, Antiquities 13.8.2; (13.236). William Whiston, editor and translator of Josephus in English, thinks this date to have been an error by Josephus, and suggests to amend the date to the second year of the 161st Olympiad.
* Josephus, Antiquities 13.8.4; (13.249). Cf. Rahamim Sar-Shalom, She'harim La'Luah Ha'ivry (Gates to the Hebrew Calendar), Tel-Aviv 1984, p. 71 (Hebrew), whose computerized tables put the 15th day of the lunar month Nisan (Passover) for the year 3630 anno mundi (131–130 BCE), or what was precisely 130 BCE, falling on a Saturday, and which, subsequently, will put the 6th day of the lunar month Sivan, which is Pentecost (Shavu'ot), falling on a Sunday, next to a Sabbath day. It was during this same year that Antiochus the Pious was slain.
* Josephus, Antiquities 14.1.2 (14.4), where, in the original Greek, is written: "Hyrcanus began his high priesthood on the third year of the hundred and seventy seventh Olympiad..., when presently Aristobulus began to make war against him." The 177th Olympiad corresponded with the 238th year of the Seleucid era, or what was then 73 BCE.
* , and precisely 27 years before Herod the Great took the city.Josephus, Antiquities 14.4.3 (14.64); 14.16.4 (14.487). The capture of the city is said to have happened in the "third month, on the fast day." The third month, counting from Nisan, is Sivan. The editor of Josephus thinks this fast to have been "on the 23rd of Sivan, the annual fast for the defection and idolatry of Jeroboam, 'who made Israel to sin.'..." This fast day is mentioned in the Shulhan Arukh (Orach Chaim 580:2). It may have also been another fast day of that same month.
* .Josephus, Antiquities 14.14.5 (14.386)
* .Josephus, Antiquities 14.16.4 (14.487). According to Josephus (Antiquities 14.16.2.; 14.470), this same year happened to be a Sabbatical Year.
* Josephus, Antiquities 15.5.1 (15.108); 15.5.2 (15.120). This date marks the 7th yr. of Herod's reign from his removing Antigonus and his taking of Judea.
* Josephus, Antiquities 17.8.1 (17.188); The Jewish War 1.33.8 (1.665)
What is the most striking of all of Josephus's statements is that he assigns 639 years from the Second Temple's rebuilding till its destruction by Titus in the 2nd year of Vespasian's reign.Josephus, The Jewish War 6.4.8 Assuming that the destruction was indeed in 68 CE (as thought by all rabbinic scholars), this would have put the Second Temple's rebuilding in 571 BCE! If destroyed in 70 CE, this would have put its rebuilding in 569 BCE. There is, at least, a 219 year discrepancy between the figures brought down by Seder Olam and those brought down by Josephus. The 1st century book, Scroll of Antiochus (Chaldaic version), claims, like the Seder Olam, that from the Second Temple's rebuilding till the 23rd year of the reign of Antiochus Eupator, son of Antiochus Epiphanes who invaded Judaea (i.e. in anno 172 of the Seleucid Era, or what was then 139 BCE), there had transpired 213 years in total, meaning, it was rebuilt in 352 BCE.On reign of Antiochus Eupator, see Antiquities of the Jews 12.9.2. (12.360). Based on Josephus' record, Antiochus Eupator began his reign after his father's death in anno 149 of the Seleucid Era (= 162 BCE).
---Davidbena (talk) 21:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, Thank you for the all detailed work. I am thinking about how best to incorporate it. First, a question, do you have a source for the second destruction being in 68CE according to the rabbis? Ar2332 (talk) 07:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added in some of your rabbinic material (there is more to go). I'm not sure where to put the Josephus material, he was not a rabbi, and also the term "missing years" does not apply to him (if anything he has "extra years"). Perhaps this material would even better go on one of the Josephus pages? Though I'm not sure that is best. Ar2332 (talk) 07:21, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the source for the Second Temple's destruction being in 68 CE is taken from Maimonides, R. Moses b. Maimon Responsa (vol. 2), ed. Jehoshua Blau, Rubin Mass Ltd. Publishers: Jerusalem 1989, responsum # 389. There, he puts down the year of destruction in anno 380 of the Seleucid era counting (ש"פ למנין שטרות), saying that the Second Temple was destroyed in the month of Av which preceded that year. Meaning, in the lunar month of Tishri began the new Seleucid era year of 380, whereas the Second Temple was destroyed in the lunar month of Av in 379 of the Seleucid era. This date corresponds with the year 68 of our Common era. The same date is brought down in most Siddurim as marking the year of destruction. As for Josephus' figures, these will probably best be incorporated in a different article.Davidbena (talk) 14:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articulating the Sources for the Discrepancy 

message: There is a well accepted one year shift in the calendar. Our shemitah we observe in Israel would be one year off without the shift. this shift is stated in Rambam laws of shemitah chapter 10 law 2 and is incorporated by many halachic authorities. I have written this in with sources. So please be respectful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathandavidh (talk • contribs) 12:49, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a matter of respect, it's a matter of our policies and guidelines. Besides the lack of inline citations and academic sources discussing your primary sources, most of what you have written seems to have been original research. I've explained this on your talk page with links to policies, guidelines, and help with citations. Doug Weller talk 14:08, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  One year shift