And He Walked Among Us... One Year Ministry of Yeshua
Written by Mark Uraine
And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh
John 6:4
If you’re at all familiar with the chronology of the ministry of Messiah, this verse should cause some hesitation. It doesn’t align with the rest of the gospels, ie. Matthew, Mark, and Luke. And yet this one verse is the basis for the belief that Yeshua’s ministry was 3.5 years long. It all hangs on this one verse. So obviously, we should dig into this a bit more.
Eusebius referring to Matthew, Mark, and Luke:
For it is evident that the three evangelists recorded only the deeds done by the Saviour for one year after the imprisonment of John the Baptist, and indicated this in the beginning of their account.
Eusebius, Church History, Book III, Chapter XXIV, 8
There are six feasts mentioned in the gospel of John. These include:
John 2:13 – The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
John 5:1 – After this there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
John 6:4 – Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand.
John 7:22 – Now the Jews’ Feast of Tabernacles was at hand.
John 10:22 – At that time the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem.
John 13:1 – Now before the Feast of the Passover.
So we begin with Passover, the first feast of the year. The next one is the unnamed feast from John 5:1. I believe this was Feast of Weeks (Shavuot) and will explain in a second. Continuing through the list, we come back to Passover, then make a huge jump to Tabernacles (Sukkot), and then Dedication (Hanukkah), which finally ends on Passover of the following year. If we based the timeline of Yeshua’s ministry solely on the gospel of John, we’d conclude that Yeshua’s ministry expanded over the course of 3 Passovers. This roughly adds up to 3.5 years. This is from where that belief originates.
However, if we pull out John 6:4… Yep, that’s right, crazy, I know, but if we remove that verse from the Bible, the gospel of John begins to align better with the other three gospels. And the chronology no longer follows a sporadic jump through history (ie. Passover to Tabernacles, skipping months in between), but instead remains consistent with a year’s timeline of Elohim’s feasts. This is how the Feast of Weeks (Shavuot), is explained as the feast mentioned in John 5:1. There are only 3 feasts that require all Hebrew men to travel to the temple in Jerusalem every year; Passover, Feast of Weeks, and Tabernacles (Exodus 23:14-17). So if Jesus was going up to Jerusalem as the Torah dictates, so that He didn’t transgress the Torah and sin, then this must be one of the three pilgrimage feasts. And this way the chronology covers a year’s time in sequential order.
Now with that knowledge of the pilgrimage feasts, let’s take another look at John 6:4 and the surrounding verses.
1 After these things Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias. 2 And a great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased. 3 And Jesus went up into a mountain, and there he sat with his disciples. 4 And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh. 5 When Jesus then lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, he saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?
John 6:1-5
Notice that Yeshua is up in the Galilee area, far North of Jerusalem. If it’s the Passover, Yeshua would be traveling to, or already in Jerusalem. This is the first oddity. Second, we read in verse 5 that the multitude is hungry and didn’t bring any food. This is extremely out of place. If the pilgrimage to Jerusalem is happening, people would be equipped with food and supplies for the long journey through the wilderness. None of this, in context to verse 4, is adding up.
An early church father struggled with this as well. John Chrysostom despised the Jews and couldn’t understand why Christians would attend synagogues in the early centuries. He comments on this verse saying,
“How then,” saith someone, “doth He not go up unto the feast, but, when all are pressing to Jerusalem, goeth Himself into Galilee, and not Himself alone, but taketh His disciples with Him, and proceedeth thence to Capernaum?” Because henceforth, He was quietly annulling the Torah, taking occasion from the wickedness of the Jews.
John Chrysostom ca. 349-407
Mr. Chrysostom’s justification for this is that Yeshua was disobeying the Torah to prove its irrelevance. This would be considered sin according to 1 John 3:4. If Yeshua did this, than He was not a perfect sacrifice. So this antisemitic interpretation from Mr. Chrysostom must be wrong.
The 3rd problem with John 6:4 shows up further down at verse 17.
And entered into a ship, and went over the sea toward Capernaum. And it was now dark, and Jesus was not come to them.
John 6:17
So after Tiberias, Yeshua heads toward Capernaum. This is even further North along the Sea of Galilee. Yeshua is essentially traveling farther away from where Elohim’s Torah states he should be going.
And finally, what does Yeshua find in the synagogue at Capernaum? He finds a synagogue full of Jewish people listening to His teaching. These are the same people that should be traveling to Jerusalem as well for Passover, if indeed it was truly Passover at hand. Nothing is making any sense at this point in John 6. And it won’t make sense until you remove verse 4. If that one verse is removed, everything falls in line: chronology, alignment with the other gospels, situational events concerning the pilgrimage feasts – everything. And Yeshua’s ministry falls within a 70 week (~16 months) period instead of 3.5 years. This will no doubt cause some paradigm shifting and shake a few cages, so I encourage you to investigate further.
Yeshua is the lamb without blemish. He could not transgress Torah and still be considered worthy of this task. If John 6:4 is true, than we have a huge problem. Yeshua is not partaking in Passover, and instead partakes with a large group of other people leading them to also transgress Torah. That isn’t the example of the Messiah. Yeshua kept the Torah obediently, He proved that man can overcome and keep it too, and set forth the example as the worthy Son of Elohim.
Passover – Last week I suggested that if John 6:4 is removed, everything begins to align much better in the timeline of Yeshua’s ministry. We looked at all the surrounding text that exposed the reason that Passover could not have been happening at that time. Yeshua wasn’t traveling to Jerusalem as the Torah instructs all males should, Yeshua was teaching in a synagogue which was full of Jews who should have also been traveling to Jerusalem. The last revelation is that many people had no food which wouldn’t make sense if people were making this trek to Jerusalem because they would have had supplies during their travels. So now let’s dig into historic arguments concerning this verse.
Zachary Pearce
So let’s start with Zachary Pearce, a Christian protestant.
[Some] are of the opinion, that the word πάσχα is an interpolation; and I think, that the whole verse is so… It does not appear from the evangelist’s account, that Jesus was present at a feast of the pass-over here mentioned; and yet it seems probable, that he, who fulfilled all righteousness [Matthew 3:15], would not have been absent from a feast of the pass-over which (as is here said) was then nigh at hand.
Zachary Pearce, 1777
To be clear, Zachary Pearce stated that he believes John 6:4 was added because there is no way Yeshua would not be at the Temple during that feast.
Gerhard Vossius
This realization goes back even further to another man named, Gerhard Vossius.
… there is no need for us to say that John 6:4 was first written… “But the holy day of the Jews was approaching,” and that the text had to do with the holy day Tabernacles… but the copyist, since he was not paying attention to it, wrote Pascha [Passover]…
Gerhard Vossius, Amsterdam 1643
It appears during the 17th and 18th centuries, the common opinion was that the verse of Passover was added.
the ancients… seem not to have read the word Pascha at John 6, since they say that Messiah predicted one year, or even a few months besides.
Ibid
“The ancients” referred to are the early church fathers. Vossius recognizes that these early church fathers never mention Passover here in John 6:4. We’ll get into this later. He also suggests like many others that Yeshua’s ministry was one year… not 3 years.
Henry Browne
Henry Browne, a Christian scholar from 1844, was struggling to work out the chronology of Yeshua as well.
The reading of the text [in] John VI:4… though it is found, I believe, in all the MSS and versions, could not have been found in the text of the two first centuries.
Henry Browne
The first two centuries of writings, according to Henry Browne, did not mention this verse. So while the above quotes are from later times that hint to what the early church fathers had in their texts, it’s best to go back and dig into these early church father’s writings themselves. What’s important here is not that these are “church fathers,” but rather they are witnesses to an early text of the New Testament. It’s not important how a church father understood the text, but rather for this study, what was in the manuscript from which he read.
The early church fathers cited the New Testament over a million times.
… so extensive are these citations that if all other sources for our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstructions of practically the entire New Testament.
Metzger and Ehrman, The Text of the New Testament
Clement of Alexandria
One such church father is Clement of Alexandria, circ. 150-212. He was an author who taught at a school in Alexandria which contained the largest library at the time. One book he authored is called Stromata.
“… And Jesus was coming to His baptism, being about thirty years old,” and so on. And that it was necessary for Him to preach only a year, this also is written: “He hath sent Me to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.” This both the prophet spake, and the Gospel.
Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, I, 21, 145
It was obvious to Clement that Yeshua’s ministry was one year. He justifies this with the words of Isaiah 61:2. We know this is from where Yeshua read in Luke 4:6-19. The understanding that Yeshua’s ministry was only one year long was the common viewpoint of the early church fathers. If John 6:4 existed in Clement’s text, this intelligent individual would not have made the mistake to suggest a one year ministry. The gospel of John would have recorded 3 Passovers – definitely not a one year period. So if Clement is suggesting one year ministry, it’s likely he did not read John 6:4 as the Passover.
Iranaeus of Lyon
But we need more than just Clement’s opinion. Iranaeus of Lyon, another church father, the disciple of Polycarp was once removed from the Apostle John himself. Iranaeus actually believed that Yeshua’s ministry was more like 20 years long due to the Pharisees suggesting that Yeshua wasn’t yet 50 years old in John 8:57. His argument was against Gnostics and others that believed in a one year ministry, and in his argument he quotes a number of Passovers from the gospel of John. Let’s dig in. So keep that in mind, his goal is to count every occurrence of Passover mentioned.
It is very surprising how [the Valentinians] claim to have found the depths of Elohim and have not searched the Gospels to see how often after his baptism the Lord went up to Jerusalem… and there celebrate the feast of Passover.
The first time he went up to the feast of the Passover was after he had made wine out of water in Cana of Galilee [John 2]… After that he went up to Jerusalem for the feast of Passover the second time. At that time he healed the paralytic who had been lying beside the pool for thirty-eight years [John 5]…
Again he departed to the other side of Lake Tiberias [John 6:1], where, when a large crowd had followed him, he satisfied that entire multitude with five loaves of bread [John 6:2-14]…
Then it is written that six days before the day of the Passover he came to Bethany [John 12]. From Bethany he went up to Jerusalem and ate the pasch [John 13] and suffered on the following day [John 19]. Now, everyone will admit that these three times of the Passover do not make one year.
Iranaeus, Adversus Haeresies Book 2, Chapter 22, Section 3
Notice that when Iranaeus quotes from John 6, he doesn’t mention the Passover. It’s important to observe what these authors don’t write as much as it is to observe what they do write. Finally Iranaeus mentions that “these three times of the Passover” and obviously isn’t including any 4th mention of Passover in John 6:4. He mustn’t of had that reference in his manuscripts.
In response to this, Henry Browne states,
… I think, incontestably, that S. Irenaeus did not read the words [Passover] in S. John VI.4. If he was so anxious to find a passover where none was (V.1.), he was not likely to overlook a passage where one was mentioned, especially as he notices the contents of that very passage…
Henry Browne, 1844
What Henry Browne is suggesting is that if Iranaeus was searching for mentions of Passover in the text, even to the point of uses John 5:1 where it only mentions “Feast of the Jews”, then he surely would not have missed John 6:4 if it was in his manuscript at the time.
Origen
The next church father is Origen. He was a disciple of Clement. He was a dedicated man to the word of Elohim, and one of the most prolific Christian authors of all time. Again, we don’t need to agree with his opinions, but can learn what he was reading at the time. In regards to Yeshua’s ministry, he had this to say,
… [Yeshua] taught only during a year and some months…
Origen, First Principles “De Principiis,” Book IV, 5
Following the simple sense of the text, some say that the Savior preached the Gospel in Judea for only one year, and that this is what the passage “to preach an acceptable year of the Lord…” (Isaiah 61:2) means…
Origen, Homilies on Luke 4:19
Origen wrote a verse-by-verse commentary on John, but the text covering John 6 was damaged, so we need to rely on other parts of his commentary to help us discern if his manuscript included John 6:4. In his text on John 5, he states,
But we must reply [to those who say that the unnamed feast in John 5 is Passover] that when he came into Galilee [John 2, just before Passover]… where earlier he had made “the water wine”… and “after these things there was a feast of the Jews [John 5], and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,” at which time he healed the paralytic…
But if this feast [John 5] were that of the Pasch (for its name is not added), the sequence of the account is cramped, and this is especially the case since a little later [John 7] it is added that “the Jews’ Feast of the Tabernacles was at hand.”
Origen, Commentary on John, Book XIII, 258
Origen is arguing that you can’t squeeze the Passover in John 5 as Iranaeus had counted because it would be too cramped. So if you can’t add a Passover in John 5, then surely you can’t add one in John 6 either! It would have covered the same period prior to the Feast of Tabernacles in John 7.
So even though we don’t have Origen’s commentary of John 6, we can infer that his manuscript did not included a Passover in that chapter.
Tyconius
Tyconius was another church father. He comes on the scene much later around 380 AD.
… did he give these precepts [Matthew 23:2-3] only for the next two days, because after them he was not alive any longer… But if he had also conveyed these things from the beginning of his preaching, it would have been a year. In that year what need was there to teach what would have been in force only until the passion?
Tyconius, ca. 380
Tyconius believed that Yeshua’s teaching was only relevant while He lived. And here, Tyconius is questioning the adherence to the Pharisees when reading the Torah on Moses’ seat, and suggests that teaching should have been conveyed for the whole year of Yeshua’s ministry and wasn’t sure why Yeshua was teaching this two days before His death. Without digging into Tyconius’ theology, it’s evident that he believed also in a one year ministry, not a 3 year ministry.
Finally
It isn’t until the 4th century when we see John 6:4 added to the text. We’ve already proven that it wasn’t included in the first three centuries by the quotes above. So it’s not about getting rid of a verse from the Bible, but rather bringing to light that two different versions exist. Don’t just believe the version in your hand. Seek out the texts, study to show yourself approved.
