David C. Hindley wrote:
> Message text written by INTERNET:K.Hanhart@...
> >Jan Van Goudoever does explain the difference between
> the old priestly calendar and the Pharisaic calendar for the beginning
> and ending of Shavuoth.<
> >What do you think?<
> Now it appears that everything boils down to the a possible change in officially sanctioned practice, similar to the difference in inerpretation regarding when to slay the passover lamb. It is still the same lunar calendar.
The terms old priestly 'calendar' and the Pharisaic calender with regard
to Shavuoth are frequently used.
1. There is no dispute re. the fact that the Boethusians defended the
priestly calendar and that at some time the dates of Shavuoth were
replaced by the Pharisaic counting of the fifty days. The temple then
still stood and in the Talmud the Pharisaic counting of the Omer
beginning with Nisan 16 still prevails. The question is WHEN the
official celebrations began on Nisan 16 which is not necessarily a
Of course,thare were other halakhic controversies in the First Century
between Boethusians and Pharisees.
2. This is no small matter. For the burial took place at the onset of
Nisan 16. Nothing happend thereafter. For the women. however, the "first
day" of Shavuoth, Nisan 17, is filled with the promise of the Messianic
harvest to come as Jesus rose from the dead, as the first fruit.
Greetings, your KAREL