Lu. xxii. 15.

And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to Jerusalem. eat this passover with you before I suffer:

alone, is not always used exclusively for the paschal lamb, but
often in a more enlarged and extended sense, for the whole feast
of unleavened bread; but the phrase payev Tò ráoxa, though
used by each of the first three Evangelists, and more than once,
is never applied except to the eating of the paschal offering
itself, at the time appointed in remembrance of the Lord's pass-
over in Egypt. The inference, therefore, from the words of St.
John above quoted is, that the Priests and Pharisees did not eat
this passover at the same time with the rest of the Jews; and
this difference may be accounted for on the supposition that our
Lord was crucified Julian Period 4742.

The passover was commanded to be celebrated in the first
month, Nisan, or Abib, which corresponds to the months of
March and April in the Christian year. It was to be killed "in
the fourteenth day of the first month; at even is the Lord's
passover," Levit. xxiii. 5. "the whole cougregation of Israel
shall kill it in the evening." If our Saviour then ate of the pas-
chal lamb with his disciples, he would eat it on the day when the
passover ought to be killed, on the evening after the fourteenth.

It will be admitted, that if our Lord had determined upon observing the passover, and if there is in truth any difference between the Jews and our Saviour on the day on which it was to be eaten, the error would be not on the part of Jesus himself, but of the Jews who differed with him. Neither his character, conduct, nor sentiments, will for a moment permit us to believe that he disobeyed, in the slightest degree, the ordinances of the Mosaic law, in deference to any traditions which existed among the Scribes and Pharisees. If he refused to follow, upon this occasion, the practice of the High Priests, and others among the Jews, his refusal must be referred to some deviation in their practice from that which had been formerly prescribed to their forefathers. Our Lord was right, and they were wrong. Whatever rules might have guided them, He at least would have eaten the Passover on the day, "when the Passover ought to be killed” ἐν ᾗ ΕΔΕΙ Θύεσθαι τὸ πάσχα, (Luke xxii. 7.)

It is well known that the months of the Jews were lunar months, but in what manner they were measured and dated, whether from the phasis or appearance of an illuminated portion of the moon's disk, or from tables in which her mean motion was calculated, and adapted to the purpose; or by some faulty and inaccurate cycle of their own, or by some other method altogether different from these, is a point upon which the most learned have disputed in every age; and which, I apprehend, can never be settled with any degree of satisfaction, from the remaining scanty and inadequate hints, which form the only materials for our judgment.

Mr. Mann, De Ann. Christ. cap. xx. 23. argues very strongly for the antiquity of the astronomical method of computation at present in use amongst the Jews, and contends that it was the method adopted so early as the times of our Saviour.

Epiphanius, Hær. 51. cum anim adv. Petavii, on the other hand, broadly asserts that the Jews, in our Saviour's time, followed the calculations of a faulty and inaccurate lunar cycle, by means of which they anticipated, in the year of his crucifixion, the proper period for the celebration of the passover by two days. Petavius defends this opinion; and he and Kepler have both, with much labour, endeavoured to draw out a set of

Lu.xxii. 16.

For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof until Jerusalem. it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.

tables upon the principles which Epiphanius has laid down;
but there is so much obscurity, and even contradiction, in the
passage in which that father treats upon the subject, that it
would be quite impossible to say whether they are right or
wrong in their conclusions.

The rabbinical doctors (and Maimonides in particular) have
referred to a third method, and stated that the ancient Jews
reckoned the beginning of their months from the phasis of the
moon, and that their present mode of calculation was not intro-
duced until after the final dispersion of the nation. Before that
period, they assert, that there were in Judea several ovvéòpia,
or committees, (as we should term them,) under the general
superintendence, and, as it were, branches of a central com-
mittee fixed at Jerusalem. The members of this committee
were in possession of certain tables, containing calculations of
the motions of the moon, which being inspected, it was thence
determined when the new moon ought and would most probably
appear. They sent out some approved and steady persons to
observe whether the moon did appear at the time at which they
expected her appearance, or not. If these persons beheld the
phasis on the night after the twenty-ninth of the current month,
they immediately proclaimed the new moon; thus determining
what would otherwise have been the thirtieth day of the cur-
rent month, to be the first of the succeeding one. If the watchers
did not return with intelligence of the observation of the phasis
before the night after the thirtieth day of the current month,
they fixed the commencement of the succeeding month on
the following day, making the current month consist of thirty
days. In other words, they determined the current month to
consist of twenty-nine or thirty days, according as their
watchers did, or did not return with intelligence of having seen
the new moon before the conclusion of the thirtieth day.

After the central committee had thus fixed the day of the new moon, messengers were sent to the several cities within the distance of a ten day's journey from the metropolis, to announce the fact. The council at Jerusalem, however, did not settle for themselves, and their own practice, whether the intercalary month should consist of twenty-nine or thirty days, until the conclusion of that month and the appearance of the new moon of the succeeding month Nisan, had pointed out which number of days it ought to consist of. Hence it is evident that there might, and would sometimes be, a difference between the members of the Jerusalem council and the rest of the Jews, in their mode of reckoning the first day of the month Nisan. If the council announced to the nation at large an intercalary month of twenty-nine days only, and afterwards found out that they were wrong in their calculations, and that it ought to have consisted of thirty days, it is evident that in that year the persons composing and adhering to the practice of the council, would differ from the rest of the Jews in counting the first, and therefore the fifteenth day of Nisan. What was the fifteenth of Nisan to the one, would be the sixteenth to the other; and perhaps some circumstance of this nature, at present unknown to us, may have occasioned the difference, if there really was any difference, amongst the Jews, as to the day of the celebration of the passover in the year of our Lord's crucifixion. Perhaps from this very cause we may explain why, as is supposed by

Lu.xxii. 17.

And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take Jerusalem. this, and divide it among yourselves :

many, our Saviour and his disciples, and the generality of the
Jews, sacrificed the paschal lamb on the evening of the Thurs-
day, and the Scribes and Pharisees, and others, not until that
of the Friday in Passion week; in other words, why our Lord
considered the Friday, and others the Saturday, as the fifteenth
day of Nisan; but, without insisting further upon this, it is
plain that the proclamation of the time of the new moon's ap-
pearance did not always determine the Jews in fixing the first
day of the month, and more especially that it did not always do
so with regard to Nisan. This is sufficient to shew, that we
are still in such a degree of ignorance with regard to the
method of calculating the Jewish months and years, as to
prevent our deciding with absolute certainty upon the day on
which the Passover took place in the year of our blessed Sa-
viour's crucifixion.

The learned Cudworth, in his admirable treatise on the Jewish
passover, has proved, from the Talmud, Mishna, and some of the
most reputable of the Jewish Rabbins, that the ancient Jews,
about our Saviour's time, often solemnized as well the Passovers
as the other feasts, upon the ferias next before and after the sab-
baths. And that the Jews in ancient times reckoned the new moons
not according to astronomical exactness, but according to the pá-
aic, or moon's appearance; and, as this appearance might happen
a day later than the real time, consequently there might be a whole
day of difference in the time of celebrating one of these feasts,
which depended on a particular day of the month; the days of
the month being counted from paris, or appearance of the
new moon. As he describes the manner of doing this, both
from the Babylonish Talmud, and from Maimonides, I shall
give an extract from this part of his work, that my readers may
have the whole argument before them.

In the great, or outer court, there was a house called Beth Yazek, where the senate sat all the 30th day of every month, to receive the witnesses of the moon's appearance, and to examine them. If there came approved witnesses on the 30th day, who could state they had seen the new moon, the chief man of the senate stood up, and cried wp, mekuddash, it is sanctified; and the people standing by, caught the word from him, and cried mekuddash! mekuddash! But, if, when the consistory had sat all the day, and there came no approved witnesses of the phasis, or appearance of the new moon, then they made an intercalation of one day in the former month, and decreed the following one and thirtieth day to be the calends. But, if after the fourth or fifth day, or even before the end of the month, respectable witnesses came from far, and testified they had seen the new moon, in its due time: the senate were bound to alter the beginning of the month, and reckon it a day sooner, viz. from the thirtieth day.

As the senate were very unwilling to be at the trouble of a second consecration, when they had even fixed on a wrong day, and therefore received very reluctantly the testimony of such witnesses as those last mentioned, they afterwards made a statute to this effect-That whatsoever time the senate should conclude on for the calends of the month, though it were certain they were in the wrong, yet all were bound to order their feasts according to it. This, Dr. Cudworth supposes, actually took place in the time of our Lord, and "as it is not likely that

Lu, xxii. 18.

For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the Jerusalem. vine until the kingdom of God shall come.

our Lord would submit to this perversion of the original cus-
tom, and that following the true paois, or appearance of the
new moon, confirmed by sufficient witnesses, he and his dis-
ciples ate the passover on that day; but the Jews, following the
pertinacious decree of the Sanhedrin, did not eat it till the
day following." Dr. Cudworth further shews from Epiphanius,
that there was contention, eópv6oc, a tumult, among the Jews
about the passover, that very year. Hence, it is likely, that the
real paschal day observed by our Lord, his disciples, and many
other pious Jews, who adopted the true paois, phasis, was only
the preparation or antecedent evening to others, who acted on
the decree of the Sanhedrim. Besides, it is worthy of note, that
not only the Karaïtes, who do not acknowledge the authority of
the Sanhedrim, but also the Rabbins themselves grant, that where
the case is doubtful, the passover should be celebrated with the
same ceremonies, two days together; and it was always doubtful
when the appearance of the new moon could not be fully ascer-
tained."

In corroboration of this opinion Bishop Pearce supposes, that
it was lawful for the Jews to eat the paschal lamb at any time,
between the evening of Thursday, and that of Friday; and that
this permission was necessary, because of the immense number
of lambs which were to be killed for that purpose, as in one year
there were not fewer than 256,500 lambs offered. See Josephus,
War, b. vii. c. ix. sect. 3. In Matt. xxvi. 17. it is said, Now the
first day of the feast of unleavened bread (τῷ δὲ πρῶτῃ τῶν ἄζυ-
μwv) the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt
thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? As the feast
of unleavened bread did not begin till the day after the pass-
over, the fifteenth day of the month (Lev. xxiii. 5, 6. Num.
xxviiii. 16, 17.) this could not have been properly the first day
of that feast: but as the Jews began to eat unleavened bread on
the fourteenth day, (Exod. xii. 18.) this day was often termed
the first of unleavened bread. Now it appears that the Evange-
lists use it in this sense, and call even the paschal day by this
name, see Mark xiv. 12. Luke xxii. 7.

Mr. Benson's profound and sagacious reasoning on the time of our Lord's crucifixion, can only be appreciated by those who are acquainted with the difficulties of this subject, and have followed his argument through all its ramifications. It is to be regretted, that the learned men who have endeavoured to decide this point, have not sufficiently examined the data, which enabled Mr. Benson to come to his very satisfactory conclusions. That the reader may perceive the discrepancies to which I allude, I here subjoin from Bowyer, the various decisions of former chronologers.

It has been computed, he observes, that from the twentieth to the fortieth year of Christ, the only passover full moon, which fell on a Friday, was April 3, A.D. 33, in the year of the Julian Period 4746. And yet Mr. Mann, in support of his hypothesis, computes it to have been so likewise March 22, A.D. 26, Julian Period 4739. Differences there will be, while some calculate by astronomical full moons, others by cycles; and while we know not whether the Jews kept the true or the mean full moons; or what cycle they followed. That which prevailed in the time of Epiphanius, Dodwell observes, De Cyclis, p. 429, was different from the Calippic, the Hippolytan, and from what the Jews now

MATT. XXVI. part of ver. 20.

Jerusalem.

20 Now-he sat down with the twelve.

follow;
from which last, however, Scaliger and Mr. Mann com-
pute. And even, if we knew the cycle, what certainty could we
expect when Maimonides, and other writers, tell us, that in a
backward season they occasionally intercalated a month, that
the harvest might be ripe enough to have the first fruits of
it offered on the second day of the passover? See Jackson's
Chronology, vol. ii. p. 19.

Sir Isaac Newton, in his Observations on Prophecies, p. 163, mentions another Jewish rule for calculating the time of the passover. To avoid the inconveniences of two Sabbaths together, which prevented burying their dead, and making ready fresh meat, &c. they postponed their month a day, as often as the third of the month Nisan was Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday; and this rule they called 18 Adu, by the letters x, 7, 1, signifying the 1st, 4th, and 6th days of the week, which days we call Sunday, Wednesday, and Friday.

Postponing therefore (a day in) the passover months above, the 14th day of the month Nisan, which A.D. 31, fell on Tuesday, March 27, will fall on Wednesday, March 28.

In A.D. 32, which fell on Sunday, April 13, will fall on Monday, April 14.

In A.D. 33, which fell on Friday, April 3, will fall on Friday, April 3, likewise.

In A.D. 34, which fell on Wednesday, March 24, or rather, for the avoiding the equinox, which fell on the same day, and for having a fitter time for the harvest, on Thursday, April 22, will fall on Friday, April 23.

In A.D. 36, which fell on Tuesday, April 12, will fall on Wednesday, April 13.

In A.D. 36, which fell on Saturday, March 31, will fall likewise on the same day.

Here the 33rd and 34th are both years on which the passover fell on a Friday; and Sir Isaac Newton determines for the 34th, two years after 32, when the passover fell very late.

I shall subjoin the several computations of the paschal full moons, by Roger Bacon, in his Opus Magnum, p. 131. Jos Scaliger and Nic. Mann, De veris annis N. D. Jesu Christi, &c. p. 239. R. Dodwell, De Cyclis, p. 84S. Mr. Ferguson in his Astronomy, Sir Isaac Newton on Prophecies, and Lamy in his Harmony, by which the reader will judge with what variety they have all been certain.