¹⁶ அவர் கலிலேயக் கடலோரமாய்ச் சென்றபோது சீமோனையும் அவர் சகோதரரான அந்திரேயாவையும் கண்டார். மீனவர்களான அவர்கள் கடலில் வலை வீசிக்கொண்டிருந்தார்கள்.¹⁷ இயேசு அவர்களைப் பார்த்து, ' என் பின்னே வாருங்கள்; நான் உங்களை மனிதரைப் பிடிப்பவர் ஆக்குவேன் ' என்றார்.¹⁸ உடனே அவர்கள் வலைகளை விட்டுவிட்டு அவரைப் பின்பற்றினார்கள்.¹⁹ பின்னர், சற்று அப்பால் சென்றபோது செபதேயுவின் மகன் யாக்கோபையும் அவர் சகோதரரான யோவானையும் இயேசு கண்டார். அவர்கள் படகில் வலைகளைப் பழுது பார்த்துக் கொண்டிருந்தார்கள்.²⁰ உடனே இயேசு அவர்களையும் அழைத்தார். அவர்களும் தங்கள் தந்தை செபதேயுவைக் கூலியாள்களோடு படகில் விட்டுவிட்டு அவர் பின் சென்றார்கள்.

மாற்கு14:¹ பாஸ்கா என்னும் புளிப்பற்ற அப்ப விழா நிகழ இன்னும் இரண்டு நாள்கள் இருந்தன. 

¹² புளிப்பற்ற அப்ப விழாவின் முதல் நாள் வந்தது. பாஸ்கா ஆட்டுக்குட்டியைப் பலியிடும் அந்நாளிலே இயேசுவின் சீடர், ' நீர் பாஸ்கா விருந்துண்ண நாங்கள் எங்கே சென்று ஏற்பாடு செய்ய வேண்டும் என விரும்புகிறீர்? ' என்று கேட்டார்கள்.¹³ அவர் பின்வருமாறு கூறி, தம் சீடருள் இருவரை அனுப்பினார்: ' நீங்கள் புறப்பட்டு நகருக்குள் செல்லுங்கள். மண்குடத்தில் தண்ணீர் சுமந்துகொண்டு ஓர் ஆள் உங்களுக்கு எதிரே வருவார். அவர் பின்னே செல்லுங்கள்.¹⁴ அவர் எந்த வீட்டுக்குச் செல்கிறாரோ, அந்த வீட்டின் உரிமையாளரிடம், ' நான் என் சீடர்களோடு பாஸ்கா விருந்து உண்பதற்கான என் அறை எங்கே? ' என்று போதகர் கேட்கச் சொன்னார் ' எனக் கூறுங்கள்.¹⁵ அவர் மேல்மாடியில் ஒரு பெரிய அறையைக் காட்டுவார். அது தேவையான வசதிகளோடு தயார் நிலையில் இருக்கும். அங்கே நமக்கு ஏற்பாடு செய்யுங்கள். ' ¹⁶ சீடர்கள் சென்று, நகரை அடைந்து, தங்களுக்கு அவர் சொல்லியவாறே அனைத்தையும் கண்டு பாஸ்கா விருந்துக்கு ஏற்பாடு செய்தார்கள்.

¹⁸ அவர்கள் பந்தியில் அமர்ந்து உண்டு கொண்டிருந்தபொழுது இயேசு, '

 யோவான்3:²² இவற்றுக்குப் பின்பு இயேசுவும் அவர்தம் சீடரும் யூதேயப் பகுதிக்குச் சென்றனர். அங்கே அவர் அவர்களோடு தங்கித் திருமுழுக்குக் கொடுத்து வந்தார்.²³ யோவானும் சலீம் என்னும் இடத்துக்கு அருகில் உள்ள அயினோனில் திருமுழுக்குக் கொடுத்துக் கொண்டிருந்தார். ஏனெனில் அங்குத் தண்ணீர் நிறைய இருந்தது. மக்கள் அங்கு சென்று திருமுழுக்குப் பெற்றுவந்தார்கள்.²⁴ யோவான் சிறையில் அடைக்கப்படுமுன் இவ்வாறு நிகழ்ந்தது

நமக்கு ஏசு என ஒருவர் வாழ்ந்தார்-மரணமடைந்தார் என்பதற்கு எவ்வித ஆதாரமும் கிடையாது, புதிய ஏற்பாடு சுவிசேஷக் கதாசிரியர்கள் புனைந்தவை மட்டுமே!

ஞானஸ்நான யோவான் கைதிற்குப்பின் முழுமையாக கலிலேயாவில் முழுதும் இயக்கம், பஸ்காவிற்காக வந்தபோது கைது-மரணம் என்னும் ஒத்தகதை சுவி புனையும் கதை.

இல்லை ஞானஸ்நான யோவான் கைதிற்கு முன்னே இயக்கம், யூதேயாவிலும் இயங்கினார்-இது யோவான் சுவி புனையும் கதை.

இரண்டில் எது உண்மை-எது பொய்? இரண்டுமே பொய்யா? ஏன் உண்மையை மாற்றி தந்தனர்?

Why does the Evangelist are not really telling the Truth and if so much of differences exitst- certainly either the authors are not honest or they do not know Jesus or both

The Unnamed Feast

The unnamed feast in John 5:1 is often proposed to be a Passover. John referred to the feast of Passover ten times, why in one case did he refer to it as a feast of the Jews? The correct view is this unnamed feast is the feast of Weeks or Pentecost. It fits naturally in the chronology of Jesus’ ministry. The gospels never mention the feast of Pentecost. John did mention both the Feast of Tabernacles and the Feast of Dedication. During the unnamed ‘feast of the Jews’ Jesus heals an invalid resting in the colonnades (John 5:2). An invalid seeking healing would be unlikely to be resting in the colonnades during the winter, as it would be too cold.^[11] In late May after Pentecost, it would be much more reasonable to wait there.

Now we come back to the deciding passage, Luke 6:1. In this passage, Jesus’ disciples are criticized for harvesting grain on the Sabbath, not for eating it before the allowed day. This means that this Sabbath occurred after the Omer and before the grain harvest was complete. If this event occurred during spring, there is no reason for requiring that Jesus’ visit to Sychar was any time other than the spring.

As long as Jesus' visit to Sychar did not occur during the winter, there is no need for the unnamed feast to require an additional year. Since the event of the woman at the well occurred in the spring, any of the feasts except Passover would not require additional time to pass.

Another reason used to extend Jesus’ ministry is many believe that Jesus’ ministry was exactly half of the seven-year period described in Daniel 9:26-27. The Bible does not state this. Second, if Jesus’ ministry was three and a half years then the next three and a half years of the seven years would immediately follow, there is no evidence that it did.

The Missing Year

A strong argument against the three-year view is Jesus’ first year of ministry is almost completely missing in the synoptic gospels. Jesus’ disciples meet and follow Him, but wait nearly a year before recording the day-by-day, week-by-week events of His ministry. The most memorable events would be during the period following the disciples’ first encounter with Jesus. They would remember best the first observed miracles and unique teachings of this remarkable man. In Mark, an early nine months of Jesus’ ministry disappears between verses 1:13 and 14, in Matthew between 4:11 and 12, and in Luke between 4:13 and 14. In these gospels, Jesus was baptized, led into the wilderness, returned after forty days, and then disappeared for about nine months. The announcement in Nazareth of the Jubilee was the next event and is usually placed in October (Luke4:16-21). John fills in this period with a wedding feast at Cana, a Passover in Jerusalem and a trip to the Jordan River to baptize. This last event is assumed to fill about six months (John 3:22 to 4:3). If the undiscussed six months of Jesus’ ministry starts with Passover—the only event after Passover is baptizing at the Jordan, but there is no mention of what Jesus taught or did during this period. If Jesus spent six months with His disciples baptizing at the Jordan River, why does this period only fill one verse. Peter tells us Jesus’ ministry began in Galilee (Acts 10:37). John then tells us Jesus went up to Sychar and spent two days talking to the woman at the well and the people of Sychar. John spends a chapter discussing the visit to Sychar, but only one verse discussing the baptism ministry. Could the baptism ministry have been short, because it only dealt with pilgrims passing through on their return trip to Galilee from Passover in Jerusalem requiring no more than a few days. The visit to Sychar was followed by “a feast of the Jews” (John 5:1), normally this feast is either taken to be the following Passover, or more often the Feast of Tabernacles in October where Jesus heals a man invalid for thirty-eight years. The next passage has Jesus in Galilee with Passover near (John 6:4), an entire year.

The visit to Sychar, gives evidence of a two-year ministry. When the second-first Sabbath occurs about a month after the first Passover of Jesus’ public ministry, there is no reason to stretch the events of the early part of Jesus Ministry. This places Jesus’ announcement of ‘the year of the Lord’s favor’ two weeks earlier on a Sabbath and the first day of the second month. This also allows enough time so the unnamed feast of the Jews fits in naturally with the feast of Weeks (Pentecost), a feast never mentioned in the gospels. See the calendar starting on page 19 for a day-by-day sequence of events.

The Historical Setting

The forth assumption is that a three year ministry better fits the correct historical period. A purpose for making Jesus ministry longer is to make up years to account for the belief Jesus was born in 4 B.C. and was thirty year old when He began to minister and died in A.D. 30 or 33. The Bible nowhere states the length of Jesus’ ministry. A strong argument can be made the eclipse of 4 B.C. is far less likely than eclipse of December 1 B.C. to be the eclipse that preceded the death of Herod the Great. Herod died after an eclipse of the moon and Jesus was born before Herod died. The eclipse that occurred in March 4 B.C. was a minor partial eclipse only visible from two to four AM. Only a small number of people noticed this eclipse, and Josephus would be unlikely to record it because he only recorded one eclipse, this one. There was a partial eclipse in which more than half the moon was obscured that was visible for two hours from the time the moon became visible about twenty minutes after sunset on December 29, 1 B.C. Since Herod died after a lunar eclipse, which occurred a month or more before the Passover, this eclipse more closely fits the data regarding the time of the birth of Jesus.[12]

The length of Jesus public ministry appears to be two years, rather than the standard figure of three years, for the following reasons. The number of Passovers celebrated during His ministry fixes the length of His ministry. Three Passovers occurred during His ministry (John 2:13; 6:4; 13:1), not four as is commonly understood. The gospels specifically state only three Passovers and John mentions them all. This would make the public ministry of Jesus just two years in length. The Passovers mark the beginning middle and end of Jesus’ ministry.[13] The two years of Jesus’ ministry are a Sabbath year and Jubilee year pair.[14]

Astronomical Signs

The Star of Bethlehem has long been sought to help identify the start of Jesus’ ministry. The only explanation that fits all the criteria was the Magi on August 24, 2 B.C. saw the Morning Star rise shortly before dawn marking a scepter formed by three other wandering stars in the constellation of the Lion, fulfilling the prophesies given by Jacob in Gen 49:9-10 and Balaam in Numbers 24:17. The Magi came 1.6 years later on Passover A.D. 1 to acknowledge the newborn king of the Jews who would rule the whole world. [15] The only eclipse of the moon the people were likely to see and mentioned by Josephus was December 29, 1 B.C just after sunset.[16] There was a significant sign the heavens to signal the start of Jesus’ ministry on March 4, A.D. 31. This sign linked the proclamation by John the Baptist that Jesus was the Lamb of God with Jacob’s ladder. The sign announced Jesus as the Lamb of God and the Ladder to heaven.[17] Finally, on the day Jesus was crucified there was a lunar eclipse/blood moon on Friday April 3, A.D. 33 the day Jesus died. St. Peter refers to this (and the three hours the sun was dark on that day) in his speech on Pentecost. He said, “The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord” (Acts2:20).[18]

A Solar or Lunar Solar Calendar

Lunar-solar calendar was assumed when generating this chronology of Jesus’ ministry. As the study continued, more problems with this assumption were found. The clearest problem is there were two Passovers celebrated during the week Jesus was crucified. A careful study of Jesus’ ministry reveals that for many or all the Jewish Feasts He followed a solar rather than a lunar-solar calendar. This has not been widely recognized, but Annie Jaubert[19] did propose this as the solution to the dating of the Last Supper. From the Dead Sea Scrolls she discovered the Essenes used a solar calendar. The number of days in each year was always divisible by seven and was normally 364. The year always started on Wednesday and the major feasts days were all on Wednesday. This is based on several things most notably Genesis 1:14. The year starts on Wednesday (actually Tuesday evening), because on the fourth day the greater and lesser lights and the stars were made (Gen 1:14-19). Before the sun and the moon exist, there cannot be days and years, as we know them. Genesis does not have the moon control the length of the month.[20] The Essenes following what they strongly believed was the correct sacred calendar divided the year into four seasons where each season is divided into three months, the first two of thirty days each and the third of thirty-one days. Some times these two calendars aligned and at other times, they were divergent. This shows up most clearly in that Jesus celebrated Passover on the day specified by the Priests in the Temple (typically Sadducees) when it agreed with the solar calendar and chose to be traveling when Passover could be celebrated on Wednesday in the second month. This way Jesus could both celebrate the Passover Seder meal and be crucified on the Passover. It was discovered years after this chronology was done that most of the days that Jesus celebrates feasts occur on Wednesdays.[21]

A Look at the Chronological Passages Bearing on Jesus Ministry

1.     Some believe the announcement of the acceptable year of the Lord, announced by Jesus refers to a Jubilee year, which must occur in the fall. Here it is proposed Jesus rather announced a Sabbath rest year immediately preceding a Jubilee rest year. The Jubilee year was always preceded by six month by a start of a Sabbath year. The Jubilee year was the time slaves were to be released. On a Sabbath Jesus said, “This day this is fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4: 21). Jesus was announcing a dual message, Time to celebrate the Jubilee and freedom from the slavery to sin. While the Jubilee was to be announced in the fall, the Sabbath year started in the spring. Jesus was calling attention to a calendar problem. He makes this announcement on the first day of the second month—but had the calendar been set correctly it should have been the first month of the year. The reason that there should have been an additional month inserted before Nisan was to prevent the feast of Tabernacles from occurring too early. The feast of Tabernacles starts on the Tishri 15. In the year A.D. 31, Tishri 15 occurred on September 22. This is three days before the Autumnal Equinox marking the beginning of fall. The feast would fall too early. This is especially important because this Tishri was the time of the start of a Jubilee year. [22]

2.     Some believe the interpretation of the parable of the fig tree (Luke 13:6) requires a four-year ministry for Jesus.[23]  This is an interpretation it is not so stated in the Bible, but Jesus does minister in parts of four years, the very end of one year, two full years and the very beginning of the fourth. The Jews normally counted any part of a year as the whole of the year.

3.     John the Baptist’s ministry was to be the forerunner. If his ministry continued long after the start of Jesus’ ministry, the people would be confused. Also, many people halfway through Jesus’ ministry thought Jesus was John the Baptist returned from the dead, a position they would not hold if Jesus and John ministered side-by-side for six months at the Jordan River.

Assumptions Consistent with a Two Year Ministry

1.     The Apostles memory for the sequence of events of Jesus' ministry would be the sharpest at the beginning and end of their time with Jesus and for unusual events. The disciples would remember the first healing of a particular type better than the tenth healing.

2.     Jesus' purpose was to announce the kingdom, train His apostles, establish and build His church. The sooner the apostles were chosen, the more time Jesus could spend training them. The sooner they were trained the sooner the Church could be established.

Assumptions for Generating a Ministry Calendar

3.     Jesus and disciples kept the Old Covenant law, so they attended the three weeklong festivals each year: Passover, Pentecost and Booths.[24] Jesus and the disciples did not travel a significant distance on the Sabbath.

4.     The ministry of John the Baptist began about five to six months before Jesus’ ministry, because John was between five and six months older than Jesus was. Elizabeth was in her sixth month or between five months and six months pregnant when Mary conceived (Luke 1:36).

5.     Jesus and disciples could easily travel about twenty-five miles (40km) per day, and family caravans move about twenty miles/day (32km).

6.     The Apostles memories for events would also be heightened by travel, especially foreign travel.

7.     It is assumed John the Baptist and Jesus did not start ministering until each turned thirty years of age.

8.     John was in his sixth month of ministry when Jesus now thirty years old came to him to be baptized in January A.D. 31 (Luke 1:26, 36).

9.     The term Jesus ‘was about thirty years old’ means He was almost exactly thirty, but His baptism did not occur “on” His birthday. See calendar page 19.

Augustus and Tiberius Caesar

Most chronographers record that Tiberius Caesar came to the throne in September A.D. 14 after Augustus Caesar died on 19 August A.D. 14. The problem with this is two historians record Augustus died shortly after a total eclipse of the sun was observed.[25] There was no total eclipse of the sun visible anywhere over the Roman Empire between January 1, A.D. 1 and February 15 A.D. 17.[26] This makes February 15, A.D. 17 the most reasonable choice for the eclipse before Augustus’ death. This would make the date for the death of Augustus to be actually August 19 A.D. 17. John the Baptist turned thirty just before the anniversary of the death of Tiberius Caesar, His ministry started in the fifteenth year of Tiberius. Luke 3:1-2, In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar … the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert. The fifteenth year would start Oct 1, A.D. 30 and end Sept 30, A.D. 31.[27] John’s ministry started at the beginning of Tiberius’ fifteenth year after John turned thirty years old. This makes sense because as Jesus did not start his ministry until forty days after he turned 30 so John did likewise. Second, the Jordan Valley is like a furnace in August and September.  The October date would start date would also be consistent with people coming to be baptized after the feast of Sukkoth (Tabernacles) and after the harvest. This later date for the death of Augustus answers the problems associated with the date of the death of King Herod the Great. King Herod did not die until after Passover A.D 1. Most ancient chronologists tied the dating of Jesus’ birth to a particular year in Augustus’ reign. If Augustus died three years later than commonly assumed, then Jesus’ birth in December 1, 1 B.C. conforms to the date given by historians of 3-2 B.C.[28]

Date of the Start of Jesus Ministry

If Jesus turned thirty in late December A.D. 30, then John would be thirty in August A.D. 30. It is here inferred that John the Baptist’s ministry started in October A.D. 30 and had been going for about three months at the time Jesus was baptized. John fasted when he turned thirty for forty days, then he served as priest with all the priests during the feast of Tabernacles (Sukkoth). After this, he served as a priest in his course (Abijah), then he started to baptize in the Jordan. John’s ministry would not then have spanned a Tabernacles pilgrimage from Galilee. Had it spanned a Tabernacles pilgrimage then Jesus would already have had an opportunity to be baptized by John as He journeyed to Jerusalem. This is unlikely. For the three Jewish pilgrim feasts: Passover, Weeks and Tabernacles all faithful Jewish men went to Jerusalem. John the Baptist being a priest would be ministering in Jerusalem during the three pilgrim festivals.

Other Views of the Second-First Sabbath

Few attempt to give a meaning to deuteroproto, therefore researching the meaning of this deuteroproto word is difficult. Archibald Robertson says, “It is undoubtedly spurious,” and “If it were genuine we should not know what it means.”[29] The United Bible Society committee majority proposed a scribe added the word first; another added the word second canceling out the word first. A third scribe misunderstood and combined the words into second-first and inserted it into the text,[30] a convoluted explanation. Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich and Danker say, “occurs no where else”, “word of doubtful meaning. Even ancient interpreters understandably could make nothing of it.”[31] Joseph Thayer is unusual in defining this word, “seem to be, the second of the first Sabbaths after the feast of Passover.”[32] This makes some sense because the Israelites were to start a new count of weeks on the day following the first Sabbath following Passover. But the better understanding is how the command to count the weeks was done.[33] Each of these days or weeks is called counting the Omer, so rather than the second first Sabbath; it would be called the first Omer Sabbath.

Harold Hoehner says, using this passage to add a Passover “is dubious for not only is the textual reading highly questionable, but also even if one accepts the reading, there are many different interpretations as to its meaning and so one cannot say that it pinpoints the occasion of the second Passover.” “To hold a view that is based on a questionable interpretation which in turn is built upon a questionable textual reading is immediately suspect.”[34] Hoehner is referring to adding a Passover due to this passage, not what is being done here using this passage to correct the addition of a Passover.

David Brown says, “Second sabbath after the first—an obscure expression, occurring here only, generally understood to mean, the first Sabbath after the second day of unleavened bread. The reasons cannot be stated here, nor is the opinion itself quite free from difficulty.”[35]

No one was found that defined deuteroproto as the first Sabbath after the second Passover as done here properly placing this passage in Jesus’ ministry.

Chronological Narrative of the First Months of the Public Ministry of Jesus Christ

Baptism and Forty Day Fast

Most dates are approximate. About Sunday, January 7, A.D. 31 (Julian calendar), Jesus left Nazareth for a forty to fifty-mile trip to the Jordan River to be baptized. John the Baptist was then baptizing at the Jordan River at Anon, about twenty to forty miles (32-64km) south of the Sea of Galilee. The next day John the Baptist announced the presence among the people of the Messiah (John 1:26). Early Tuesday the following day, Jesus was baptized by John in the Jordan River. This was January 9, A.D. 31 on the Julian calendar, January 7, A.D. 31 on the Gregorian calendar, and Tevet 22 on the Jewish calendar. That day Jesus’ started a forty-day fast (Mark 1:9-12). The fast actually lasted forty-six days because it was illegal to fast on a feast day and the Sabbath days were feast days.[36] It is assumed a fast would end on a Sabbath, as this would put the longest possible period of continuous fasting at the end of the period of fasting. Josephus interpreted the reading of the Law during the feast of Tabernacles as specifically prohibiting fasting on feast days.[37] “No fasting was done on the Sabbath (Judith, viii, 6) on the contrary, the choicest meals were served to which friends were invited.”[38] At the end of His fast, Jesus returned to the Jordan and John the Baptist pointed Him out as the Lamb of God (John 1:29). Jesus was probably visible in the distance, but not nearby. The following day at 10 AM, John again identifies Jesus as the Lamb of God and Jesus received His first disciples Andrew and John (John 1:35-39).

During the period of His fast, Jesus was in the wilderness of Judah. This would be the area west of the Dead Sea and if He wandered during this period may have included the area down to the Negev. It is likely Jesus ended the forty days at Mt Sinai, because the only other Biblically recorded forty-day fasts, those of Moses and Elijah both ended at Mt. Sinai. Mt Sinai is also called Horeb (Deut. 9:8-9, 1 Kings 19:8).[39] Moses and Elijah were also tested during their fasts. God made some unusual provisions for Moses and Elijah’s fasts, Moses went without water and Elijah was fed special bread and water by an angel.

The First Disciples

The fourth day following the end of Jesus’ fast was the feast of Purim. This was the fiftieth day since Jesus’ baptism, almost like a jubilee day for the start of His ministry. Enough time for Jesus to rest on the Sabbath and then hustle north 130 miles (210km) to the Jordan River. It seems likely these disciples of John the Baptist who became Jesus’ earliest disciples took time off from fishing or similar work and used the time of the feast Purim to visit John. While with John, they were taught and baptized. John the Baptist may have recently moved his ministry closer to Galilee to make the trip shorter for those from Galilee. The gospel of John gives the day-by-day detail of what was occurring during this period. The Pharisees challenged John the Baptist and rejected his message and teaching. The next day the second day of Purim, John announced Jesus is the Lamb of God. The day following Purim about 10 AM, John the Baptist encouraged his disciples John and Andrew to follow Jesus. After spending the day with Jesus, in the evening, they went to get their gear and find their brothers. Peter and James became disciples that evening. Andrew brings Peter to Jesus (John 1:40-41).[40] It is likely John the Baptist sent John and Andrew to Jesus about the time he needed to leave, because on Saturday, John the Baptist ministered in the Temple in the course of Abijah for eight days, no later than Thursday morning he had to leave to journey the fifty or so miles (80km) to Jerusalem. See Dionysius Exiguus for the details of the dating of the priestly courses. It is likely that at that time, he criticized Herod and Herodias’ adulterous union. On the following day, Jesus and His disciples were getting ready to make their way back to Galilee. However, in the crowds, Jesus located at least two more disciples Nathaniel[41] of Cana and Philip. Since their route took the group directly to a wedding in Cana and Jesus’ mother is at that same wedding, she may have joined the group as they passed through Nazareth. Was Nathaniel a member of the family of the bride or groom and did he invite the entire group? It is about fifty miles (80km) from the Jordan River uphill to the city of Cana; it is assumed this trip took about two days.

            A further link to this time was discovered. There was sign in the heavens to mark the start of Jesus’ ministry. On the evening of Sunday March 4, AD 31, all five visible planets formed a ladder reaching from earth with its top in the center of the sky and marking the constellation of the Lamb (Ares). Precisely confirming Jesus Statement (John 1:51). See Lamb of God.

Wedding at Cana

The third day (we would say the day after tomorrow) they arrived in Cana of Galilee and went to a wedding feast. However, there is a second way to look at this third day. The traditional Jewish wedding was on Tuesday, the third day of the week, because in on the third day of creation God said, “It is good” twice (Gen 1:10-12). So Tuesday was considered a day of double blessing. The Jews referred to the days by number rather than by name, except Friday was the day of preparation and Saturday was the Sabbath. Here the third day probably refers to both the day after tomorrow and Tuesday. The traditional Jewish wedding lasted one week. The changing of water into wine probably occurred near the beginning of the wedding week because Jesus avoided waste, since he created so much wine there must have been a need. Second, the wedding had not yet switched to the poorer wine. Why would there be a need for a hundred and fifty gallons of wine. Maybe the wine planned for much of the wedding feast turned to vinegar. This is strengthened because the steward tasted the wine, likely testing for problems.

Jesus Sends Out His Disciples

After this point, it gets harder to track the day-by-day or even week-by-week events of Jesus’ ministry. We do know He trained His apostles and then sent them out two by two to minister to the towns of Israel. At the beginning of the next year, His disciples regrouped in Capernaum at which time Jesus went into the wilderness and fed the five thousand men. The next day in Capernaum He turned the crowds away from following Him by telling them they must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Many in the crowds refused this teaching and turned away and even the apostles had difficulty with this teaching. Nevertheless, Jesus stuck to His story. For a day-by-day review of the events of the early period of the second year of Jesus ministry, see Easter Transfiguration.[45] By the Essenes' solar calendar, this teaching appears to have occurred on Passover. It could very well be that Jesus was traveling during this period to boycott the Sadducees date for the Passover. By timing His pilgrimage to Jerusalem to the Second Passover a month later, he reduced His risk of losing His life earlier, Passover was Wednesday and He had only a short period to wait in Jerusalem before the feast of Pentecost.

From the time of the second Passover of Jesus’ ministry, this chronology follows the standard chronology of the last year of Jesus ministry. It is worthy of note, the events of John 7:4 to 10:21 the Feast of Tabernacles and the healing of the man born blind by putting mud on his eyes all occurred within in a few days. This passage occurred in the context of the feast of Tabernacles, closing the Jubilee year. Jesus did not go up to the feast at the usual time but came later in the middle of the feast (John 7:14), at which time He had recently done a miraculous healing of a man on the Sabbath (John 7:21-23). In John 9:1-10:21 in a follow-up visit to the man born blind, there is description of the full story that actually started on the Sabbath a few days earlier. Jesus could legitimately not come to the feasts because preserving his life is a higher law than keeping the festivals. A second possible reason for Jesus coming late to the feast, would be that Jesus was keeping the festivals on by their time on the solar calendar rather than on the Lunar-Solar colander of the Priests. Jesus said for me the right time has not yet come (John 7:8).[46] When the feast was over from the viewpoint of the Priests, Jesus remained. The last and greatest day of the Feast was a Wednesday, the proper start of the feast by the solar calendar. Jesus that night observed a Sabbath, He journeyed only to the Mount of Olives within a Sabbath days walk of Jerusalem. The next morning, rather than returning home, He was back in Jerusalem teaching (John 7:37; 8:1-2).

Ministry to Israel / Ministry to All

The ministry of Jesus during the first year, at least as far as miracles are concerned, was confined to the house of Israel. When Jesus sent the twelve out to minister in pairs, He sent them only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. He did talk to the Samaritan woman and the people of Sychar but no miracles are recorded. Jesus did also heal the servant of a Centurion at the request of the synagogue leaders, but the servant may have been Jewish, and the synagogue leaders had begged Jesus to help. There is a transition after the rejection of Jesus’ message of the ‘Bread of Life’ in John 6. After this, Jesus did start to minister to the Gentiles. This is first shown in the healing of the daughter of the Syro-Phoenician woman where Jesus said He was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But He then proceeded to the Decapolis where He not only healed the gentiles, but also fed four thousand of them. When Jesus sent out the seventy or seventy-two He did not give them instructions to go only to the house of Israel. One can discern they went to the gentile areas from the cities that Jesus later visited following them.

Feeding 5000, 4000 and the Transfiguration

This section of Jesus’ ministry is more fully documented in the article Easter Transfiguration,[47] It appears that Jesus skipped going to Jerusalem at Passover in the middle of His ministry at the normal time. He fed 5000 Jewish pilgrims preparing to go to Jerusalem for Passover. However, He and His disciples instead journeyed to Tyre and Sidon rather than heading for Jerusalem. He returned to the Decapolis and fed 4000 gentiles. After which He headed to Cesarea Philippi where on Passover Saint Peter identifies Jesus as the Messiah and Jesus starts talking about his death. He then journeyed south to Mt. Nebo where He was transfigured on the day that would become Easter Sunday in one year. When he comes down from that mountain, he encounters the Galilean pilgrims returning from Passover in Jerusalem. He accompanies them back to Galilee, but secretly returns to Jerusalem in the second month to celebrate Passover on the day that is proper in both the solar and lunar-solar calendar for Passover in the second month.

The Last Supper

Annie Jaubert has convincingly proposed that the Last Support occurred on Tuesday evening rather than the following Thursday evening.[48] The Essene community kept a solar calendar where Passover always occurred on a Wednesday so the Last Supper would be held on Tuesday evening. One of the chief advantages of this proposal is that the six trials of Jesus do not have to be shoehorned into the six hours between Midnightand 6AM. Annas, Caiaphas, Herod, Pilate, and all members of the Sanhedrin do not have to stay up all night rushing to try Jesus and breaking their own law regarding when a trial of condemnation could take place.

Friday Crucifixion

For those who believe that Jesus crucifixion had to be earlier than the traditional Friday because of Matthew 12:40 (For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth). There are many arguments that a part of the day was counted as the whole day. There is another way to look at this problem, from the time Jesus was “condemned” He could be counted as dead and if dead then in the grave. At his trial, he was condemned by Pilate at 6AM on Friday and could be counted as in the grave from this time. For this to be three days and three nights, we have to see the three hours of darkness as a night. The first day would then be 6AM to noon; the first night would be the hours of darkness from noon to 3PM. The second day would be 3PM Friday to 6PM, and the second night 6PM Friday to 6AM Saturday. The third day would be 6AM Saturday to 6PM and the third night 6PM Saturday to just before dawn on Sunday. The second note on this interpreting verse is that Jesus says, “just as” Jonah was in the belly of the whale, if the “just as” includes the period from when Jonah was taken by lot before he was swallowed by the whale the situation could match Jesus’ situation.

In all four gospels, the day of Jesus’ Crucifixion is called the ‘day of preparation’. The Jews numbered the days of the week, except they referred to Friday as the ‘day of preparation’ and Saturday as the Sabbath. On the afternoon of Sunday, the disciples on the road to Emmaus referred to that day being the third day since these events took place (Luke 24:21). Because the Jews counted days (and years) inclusively, this must refer to Friday.

Conclusion

From the earliest days of the Church, the two-year ministry has been proposed. In the Jewish culture, one was commanded to count the Sabbaths from the time of the wave offering until the feast of Weeks. The law also permitted one to celebrate the Passover in the second month under certain conditions. If one were counting from this second Passover one would count the first Sabbath following the second Passover as the second-first Sabbath. This concept has apparently escaped all modern chronologist of the ministry of Jesus so they have missed this point. When properly understood the early weeks of Jesus' ministry come into clearer focus. Jesus was active in ministry from the time of His first public appearance. He promptly chose His apostles. He was constantly on the run for His life. The evangelists record many details of Jesus’ first few months. In the three-year ministry, we are left with very few details of Jesus entire first year of ministry. Even if the interpretation of second-first Sabbath is rejected the logic of events happening as presented here is far more compelling that the standard three-year ministry.

What have we learned? A two-year ministry indicates the disciples were trained faster with emphasis on practicality. The two years of His ministry were a Sabbath year—Jubilee year pair, indicating what? Maybe all of Israel should have followed Jesus for two years. Easter is the start of a new epoch of harvest because there was to be no harvest during the two previous years. That many of the crowds encountered by Jesus were pilgrims going to Jerusalem for a festival or returning from a festival to Galilee. The timing of the raising of the son of the widow of Nain emphasizes the number three in the resurrection. We understand why Jesus healed the nobleman’s son from a distance; He had an appointment for a specific date that would be missed if He journeyed back to Capernaum. It is clear that Jesus’ life was continually threatened during his ministry; there were no periods of peace.

Jesus by the timing of his actions particularly when he celebrated feasts associated with Passover strongly supported a solar calendar over a lunar-solar calendar. The Essenes kept a solar calendar where the principle feasts all started on a Wednesday. Jesus appears to reject the dating of these feasts unless they start on a Wednesday. The statement by John that Jesus was the Lamb of God occurred on a Wednesday. The Feeding of the 5000 appears to coincide with the correct day of Passover. The feeding of the 4000 likely occurred on the following Wednesday. When Jesus celebrated the Passover, He chose the celebration starting on a Wednesday if possible. Jesus on at least in three occasions, appears to have kept the law as God willed it to be kept when there was a conflict with how it was officially interpreted by the ruling priests, in the timing of eating grain on the Sabbath, at one feast of Tabernacles where Jesus came late and at His final Passover where He appeared to celebrate the Passover Seder early.

APPENDIX B: 28C.E.
Justifying one year ministry and dating Jesus' crucifixion, Paul's three missionary journeys & council of Jerusalem
Front page: Jesus, a historical reconstruction
You may email the author, and learn more about him here
Note: all emphasese are mine

1. The synoptic gospels evidence:

According to the gospels of "Mark", "Matthew" and "Luke" (the synoptic gospels), many biblical critical scholars would agree Jesus' public life seems no longer than one year. And looking at Mark's gospel (the least elaborated and the earliest), some postulate all the major events in Jesus' ministry happened within a few months:
"While I used to toy with the idea that GJohn might justify the idea that HJ [Historical Jesus] had an extended public career, I have long since abandoned that notion. I now think that Crossan is correct. HJ was a flash in the pan, with his public career ... lasting less than a year, perhaps only a couple of months." Malhon H.Smith, on Crosstalk
Many prominent 2nd, 3rd & 4th century Christians (such as St Clement of Alexandria, 150-211/216) also called for an one-year "ministry".

Notes: 
a) "Luke" thought Jesus had an one-year "ministry", because in GLuke (and only here), Jesus, at the beginning of his public life, is quoting a passage of 'Isaiah', which includes a reference to an one-year period:
Lk4:17-21 "... And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written: "The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor; ... to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD." ... And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.""
b) MSN Encarta, for "Jesus Christ": "All three Synoptic Gospels ... record Jesus' public ministry as beginning after the imprisonment of John the Baptist, and as lasting for about one year ..."
c) Eusebius of Cesarea, 'History of the Church' (published c.316), III, 24, 8: "For it is evident that the three [synoptic] evangelists recorded only the deeds done by the Saviour for one year after the imprisonment of John the Baptist"
d) From "Chronology of the Life of Jesus Christ", Catholic Encyclopedia: "the year of my redemption" (Isaiah 34:8; 63:4), appear to have induced Clement of Alexandria ['Stromata', I, 21, 145], Julius Africanus [160-240], St Philastrius [4th cent., died before 397], St Hilarion [291-371], and two or three other patristic writers to allow only one year for the public life."
Other early Christians believing an one-year ministry include the followers of (gnostic) Basilides (active 120-140) (according to Clement's 'Stromata', I, 21, 146) and the ones of (gnostic) Valentinus (active 120-160) (according to Irenaeus 'Against Heresies', I, 3, 3), Origen (185-254) (De Principiis, IV, 1, 5 "[Christ] taught about a year and a few months"), Tertullian (160-220?), Lactantius (late 3rd to early 4th cent.), St Gaudentius (died c. 410), Evagrius (4th cent.), Orosius (375?-418?) and StEphraem (306?-373).
e) In 'Against Heresies', II, 22, 4-6, the very influential St Irenaeus (130?-200?) "demonstrated" that the public life of Jesus lasted twenty years!
"... He did not therefore preach only for one year, nor did He suffer in the twelfth month of the year. For the period included between the thirtieth and the fiftieth year can never be regarded as one year, ..."

Remarks: Irenaeus' comment, based of John's gospel (8:57), shows that there was no significant acceptance then (around 180) about a three (or two) years ministry: that will come later.
The first one to mention a three-year ministry might have been Origen (changing his mind!) in 'Commentary on Matthew' (Book XXIV), written late in his life, but Eusebius (early 4th cent.) was the first to argue for it.
In his 'Demonstratio Evangelica' (published before 311) VIII, 106, 8, Eusebius stated, "the whole period of our Savior's teaching and marvel-working is recorded to have been three years and a half, which is half of a week [reference to the book of Daniel, seen here as containing prophecies about Jesus! Look here in order to understand it is not the case!]. This, I take it, John the Evangelist accurately establishes by his presentation in the gospel."
He then erroneously stated (in order to demonstrate the ministry was less than four years!), "Since, then, he (Jesus) began in the high priesthood of Annas[!!! Annas was high priest during 7-13/14C.E.] and continued to the reign of Caiaphas the intervening time does not extend to a full four years [WRONG: this time can be as long as 29 years (7-35C.E.) and cannot be shorter than 12 years (14-26C.E.)]." ('History of the Church' (published 311-325) I, 10, 2)
Later in the same book (III, 24, 11) Eusebius explained John's gospel covers a longer period than the others, but did not mention three years.
Finally, in his 'Chronicles' (published 325) he ascribed the crucifixion to the eighteenth year of Tiberius, basing himself on an eclipse and the false claim that,"It is written [in John's gospel] that after the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar the Lord preached three years."
Note: Eusebius repeatedly claimed that John's gospel represents a three-year ministry, but he offered no specific arguments. It seems the three-years came from the O.T, that is the book of Daniel.

Normally, a pious Jesus, with no obligation (and having high regard for the temple -- his most direct followers, the "Nazarenes" certainly did) would be expected to go to Jerusalem for each Passover; but during his public life, only one trip for Passover is reported in GMark.

And, if ever the "ministry" would have lasted for two or three years, why wasn't it written in the synoptic gospels? Evidently, it would have been beneficial to say it.

But then, if three gospels imply one year, and the fourth gospel suggests more, why choose the one (GJohn, the last one) in the minority (one against three)? Like I said, it is more beneficial to invoke a long "ministry" rather than a short one.

2. John's gospel evidence:

We have to pay close attention to GJohn, because it is here (and only here) that a longer "ministry" is implied, because of the three Passovers reported in Jesus' public life: one at the start (Jn2:13), one in the middle (Jn6:4), and one at the very end (Jn12:1).

The author of GJohn does not say that Jesus "ministry" lasted two or three years. But the extension from one year (synoptic gospels) to (a minimum of) two years & about one month (GJohn) is implied indirectly by the mention of the two additional Passovers.

There are many differences between GJohn and the synoptic gospels. John's gospel is considered by most biblical critical scholars to be the least credible (by far!). They are many signs of editing, cut and paste operations, latter additions and so forth. Major stories like the (very public) resurrection of Lazarus (here the main cause for Jesus' crucifixion, not any "disturbance") and Jesus' several extended visits (with preaching) in Jerusalem are not even mentioned in the synoptic gospels!

In conclusion, this gospel, at least in its final form, cannot be relied upon concerning the duration of Jesus' ministry.

Note: anyone who read this Section before April 3rd/2001 will notice I considerably reduced its content. This is the result of my on-going research on the making of GJohn. I am now confident about the validity of my reconstruction, verse by verse, of the original gospel and its later alterations. I hope to write a page about it (with arguments for justification on each item) within the next months. A preview: the original version came with only two Passovers, the middle one (Jn6:4), and the last one (Jn12:1). But the first one (Jn2:13) was added later (when relocating 2:14-3:21 from 12:19^20).

Done! as of September 2001:
John's gospel, from original to canonical
Better than expected: the original gospel points to an one-year public life, more so than the synoptic gospels.

3. Historical evidence:
Note: all dates are C.E. (Christian/Common Era).

If Jesus started his ministry in the spring of 27C.E. (according to previous Appendix) and it lasted only one year, his crucifixion would be in 28C.E. And there is another way to authenticate that later year; see what follows:

3.1 The presupposition:
The first generation Christians were expecting the Kingdom to come soon:
Heb10:25b "... let us encourage one another-- and all the more as you see the Day approaching."
Heb10:37 "For in just a very little while, "He who is coming will come and will not delay ...""
But when?
Paul was certainly not setting any date in order to avoid disillusion, even if that would happen before:
1Co15:51 "We will not all sleep [be dead]"
Rather, he stressed that would come unexpectedly:
1Th5:1-2 "Now, brothers, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night."

But, because "seven" is the most sacred (God's) number and prophesying was encouraged:
1Th5:20 "do not treat prophecies with contempt."
1Co14:1 "... eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy."
and prophets existed in the earliest Christian churches:
Ac13:1 "In the church at Antioch [around 42], there were prophets and teachers ..."
it is likely other believers prophesied that the Kingdom would come seven years after Jesus' crucifixion (35). And when nothing occurred then, some would hope for fourteen (2 X 7), then twenty one (3 X 7), then twenty eight years later (56) ...

At the first occurrence of an "anniversary" in a new Christian area (as for the two events we'll consider later), many people who thought about joining (to be on the safe side!) would do so in crowds. The sudden upsurge in number of those "sectarians" would alarm the authorities or some "special interest" groups. As a result, persecution against believers was likely to be unleashed.
So, if Jesus was crucified in the spring of 28, then we can expect this "phenomenon" to have occurred in Jerusalem for 35, at the time the main and possibly the only (proto) Jewish Christian center. Well, as I will show next, it happened there that year (and most likely in the spring!).
Later, a true Christianity developed around the Aegean sea, first Macedonia and Greece (from 50), then Asia Minor (from 52-53). There, this phenomenon would have been due in 56. Well, again, as explained later, it happened then too (and most likely in the spring!).
The two events are surprisingly well documented. The problem is the dating. So hang on with me, if you please!

3.2 The two events:

3.2.1 The first persecution in Jerusalem:
Note: it led to Paul's conversion.

Ac6:7-9 "Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith. And Stephen [a Greek speaking Jew], full of faith and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. Then there arose some from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen (Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and those from Cilicia and Asia), disputing with Stephen."
Ac7:58-59a,8:1-3 "and they cast him out of the city and stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul [Paul]. And they stoned Stephen ... Now Saul was consenting to his death. At that time a great persecution arose against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation over him. As for Saul, he made havoc of the church, entering every house, and dragging off men and women, committing them to prison."
Ac9:1-2 "Then Saul [Paul], still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem."
Ac26:10b-11a "On the authorities of the chief priests I [Paul] put many of the saints in prison, and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them. Many a time I went from one synagogue to another to have them punished, ..."
Paul in Gal1:13 "For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it."

3.2.2 The "riot" in Ephesus:

Ac19:23-34 "And about that time there arose a great commotion about the Way. For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, who made silver shrines of Diana, brought no small profit to the craftsmen. He called them together with the workers of similar occupation, and said: "men, you know that we have our prosperity by this trade. Moreover you see and hear that not only at Ephesus, but throughout almost all Asia, this Paul has persuaded and turned away many people, saying that they are not gods which are made with hands. So not only is this trade of ours in danger of falling into disrepute, but also the temple of the great goddess Diana may be despised and her magnificence destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worship." Now when they heard this, they were full of wrath and cried out, saying, "Great is Diana of the Ephesians!"
So the whole city was filled with confusion, and rushed into the theater with one accord , having seized Gaius and Aristarchus, Macedonians, Paul's travel companions. And when Paul wanted to go in to the people, the disciples would not allow him. Then some of the officials of Asia, who were his friends, sent to him pleading that he would not venture into the theater.
Some therefore cried one thing and some another, for the assembly was confused, and most of them did not know why they had come together. And they drew Alexander out of the multitude, the Jews putting him forward. And Alexander motioned with his hand, and wanted to make his defense to the people. But when they found out that he was a Jew, all with one voice cried out for about two hours, "Great is Diana of the Ephesians!""

3.3 Dating of the persecution in Jerusalem:

3.3.1 Spring of 52:

Gallio was proconsul of Achaia (Ac18:12) from the summer of 51 and for a period of less than one year. The incident reported in Ac18:12-17 (involving Gallio and Paul) is described to have occurred in the latter part of Paul's a year and a half stay in Corinth (Ac18:11). Consequently, it would be in the spring of 52 (the NIV Study Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible are in agreement with this date) that Paul went from Corinth to Jerusalem (Gal2:1-10, Ac18:18-22).
Spring was the season to start traveling from a home base (as in Ac20:6, also from Corinth to Jerusalem) and winter the time to stay put:
1Co16:6 "Perhaps I [Paul] will stay with you awhile, or even spend the winter [in Corinth, which he did later, in 57-58 (Ac20:3)] ..."
Furthermore, after his visit to Jerusalem in 52:
Ac18:22b-23 NAB "... then went down to Antioch [as corroborated in Gal2:11]. After staying there some time, he [Paul] left and traveled in orderly sequence through the Galatian country and Phrygia, bringing strength to all the disciples."
This kind of travel was most likely to be done during the dry summer/early fall months.
Also the duration of the sojourn in Corinth:
"So Paul stayed [in Corinth] for a year and a half, teaching them the word of God." (Ac18:11)
has Paul arriving here in the fall of 50, which is very plausible: that would have given him enough time (from spring to fall) for his "second journey" from Antioch, including another visit to cities in Lycaonia & Pisidia (so-called "southern" Galatia), and setting up new Christian communities in Macedonia and Athens (Ac15:41-17:34).

When was the "council" of Jerusalem?
Ac15:1-35 specifies this meeting occurred between the first and second journey. And most scholars agree this "council" in Jerusalem, about Gentiles' admission in the faith, is the same as narrated by Paul himself in Gal2:1-10 (with the version in 'Acts' very much embellished!). But is the timing correct in 'Acts'?
Likely not, because in Gal2:1-14 it is suggested the meeting happened later, that is between the second and third journey (in 52). Let's note "Luke" did tell of one Paul's visit at that particular time, without any details:
Ac18:22 NAB "Upon landing at Caesarea, he [Paul] went up and greeted the church and then went down to Antioch."
Here are the clues:
a) Titus is mentioned in Gal2:1-3 as a companion of Paul on his trip to Jerusalem for the "council". However, Titus is not in 'Acts', even if other companions/helpers are named with Paul during his first journey (Barnabas) and the second one (Silas & Timothy). But Titus appears (prominently) in '2Corinthians' (written during Paul's third journey) as the main "helper" towards the Corinthians:
2Co8:23 "As for Titus, he is my partner and fellow worker among you;"
That would date the "council" of Jerusalem described in Gal2:1-10 after Paul went to Europe (second journey), assuming this (uncircumcised) Titus was one of Paul's converts there, which is very likely.
b) The public dispute in Antioch with Peter (Gal2:11-14), right after the meeting in Jerusalem (Gal2:1-10), was about the critical issues of forcing Jewish customs on Gentile converts (Gal2:14) and Jews (even if Christians) not mingling with them & sharing their food:
"... I withstood him to his face [Peter's], because he was to be blamed ... "... why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?""
That was imposed by James (Jesus' brother), through his own men (Gal2:12). Not only Peter followed James on this, but also all Jews in the church of Antioch (except, of course, Paul), including Barnabas:
Gal2:13 "And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him [Peter], so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy."
In this situation, it would be very unlikely for Silas, a Jew close to the "Nazarenes" (Ac15:22), to accompany Paul (who defied James' directives!) as stated in the beginning of the second journey (Ac15:40). Furthermore, Ac18:23,19:1 indicates that, at the start of the third, Paul is traveling alone from Antioch to Ephesus, which is very understandable, taking in account his isolation following the aforementioned dispute. Another point: after taking such a strong public stand against Judaization of Gentile converts, why would Paul flip-flop soon after, by circumcising Timothy (Ac16:3, onset of second journey)?
Simply, the second journey (with Silas and Timothy ) does not fit as the one started after the "council" in Jerusalem (followed by the break-up in Antioch), but the third one (with Paul alone) does.
c) According to Gal2:2-5, Paul was worried his very own "ministry" being in jeopardy because:
Gal2:4 "... of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage),"
Also, Gal2:2 implies the "Nazarenes" were not aware of the specifics of Paul's gospel:
" ... [I, Paul] communicated to them [the pillars of the church of Jerusalem] that gospel which I [& NOT 'we'] preach among the Gentiles"
Again this situation simply does not fit if the "council" happened between the first & second journey:
The former trip had been sponsored by the church of Antioch (Ac13:2-3), which also was fully informed after its completion (Ac14:27-28). Furthermore, Paul was then always in the company of Barnabas, well known & trusted by the "Nazarenes" (Ac5:36,11:22-26).
But the aforementioned situation makes a lot more sense if related to the second journey:
Then Paul was the only main preacher (that is without Barnabas), converting Gentiles (& some Jews) in far away Macedonia & Achaia. And it was done in such a way the Jews of Corinth united against Paul in order to bring him to a court presided by the proconsul (Ac18:12-17), because "This fellow persuades men to worship God contrary to the law." (definitively a subject of concern for the "Nazarenes", all of them devoted Jews!).

 

Notes:
A) Some scholars, like Colin Hemer, proposed that the meeting narrated in Gal2:1-10 is not the same as in Ac15:1-29, but instead corresponds to the one in Ac11:28-30,12:25. There are many problems with that:
a) Gal2:1-10 does not say the purpose of Paul's trip to Jerusalem is to provide funds to the "Nazarenes", as it is explained in Ac11:28-30.
b) Gal2:1-10 specifies the Gentiles' conversions by Paul (& Barnabas) was the main issue, discussed and then accepted by the "pillars". That is what also shows in Ac15:1-29, even if here the account is vastly embellished.
c) The funds in question are to allow the church of Jerusalem to buy food, made very expensive due to a famine affecting the whole Roman empire (Ac11:28). This famine happened in 46, but the dating given by Hemer for the meeting described in Gal2:1:10 is two years later, in 48!
Furthermore, to make things even more absurd, according to Ac11:28-30,12:25, the same meeting would have occurred around the time of Agrippa I's death (Ac12:1-23) in the spring of 44!
B) If 52 is accepted as the year of the "council of Jerusalem", then according to the "fourteen year" in Gal2:1, no other trip to Jerusalem by Paul took place, that is after he visited Peter for fifteen days (Gal1:18-29 corresponding to (again grossly embellished) Ac9:26-30). Consequently the two Jerusalem visits by Paul in 44 (or 48) and in between the first & second journey (50), appear to be fictional, as a ploy by "Luke" to show that Paul was in close, good & frequent relation with the "Nazarenes". Also, I explained Luke's motives about placing the "council" before the second journey (rather than after it) on this page.

3.3.2 Spring of 38:

In Gal2:1 "Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me."
There, it appears Paul was taking as a reference his previous visit to Jerusalem prior to 52. Therefore, this trip was in 38:
Gal1:18 "Then after three years, I went to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days."

3.3.3 Spring of 35:

In Gal1:15-18 "But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me,
[referring to Paul's conversion in Damascus (Ac9:18)]
` that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days [in 38, as already established]."
These "three years" refers to the period between Paul's conversion (right after leaving Jerusalem) and his next visit to the same city (also related (and embellished) in Ac9:26-30).
Therefore, Paul's conversion occurred in 35 (the NIV Study Bible is also in agreement with this date), probably spring (because 3 + 14 years later was in the spring of 52). The persecution in Jerusalem, then Judea and beyond, which could not have been too long, happened in the months prior to that.

3.3.4 Recapitulation of Paul's early years:

a) Winter/spring 35: Paul takes part into the persecutions against the proto-Christians starting in Jerusalem (Gal1:13,23a, Ac7:57-8:1-4a,9:1-2)
b) Late spring 35: Paul's conversion in Damascus (Gal1:15-16a, Ac9:18b)
c) Spring 38: three years later (Gal1:18a), Paul escapes from Damascus (2Co11:32-33, Ac9:25) and returns to Jerusalem for a fifteen days visit at Peter's home (Gal1:18b-19, Ac9:26).
d) Spring 38 to spring 42: Paul's exit from Jerusalem (Ac9:30) and stay in his home city, Tarsus in Cilicia (today southern Turkey)
Note: 42 is likely (according to the clue in 2Co12:2) but cannot be firmly established.
e) Spring 42: Paul is invited by Barnabas to join him in Antioch (Ac11:25-26a).
f) Spring 42 to winter 48/49: Paul is based in Antioch as the protege and companion of Barnabas, participating in missionary journeys in Syria and Cilicia (Gal1:21).
g) Spring & summer of 49: most likely time for Paul and Barnabas (westward) missionary trip ("Paul's first journey") to Cyprus, Pamphylia and "southern" Galatia. Back to Antioch for the winter (note: this trip could have happened one or a few years earlier and lasted longer)
h) Spring 50 to spring 52: Paul's second journey leading to the creation of Christian communities in Macedonia (Philippi, Thessalonica and Berea), Athens and Corinth (where he stays one year and a half - Ac18:11)

3.4 Dating of the "riot" in Ephesus:

A) Paul's third journey

Please consult the aforementioned page for the detailed & documented study. A recapitulation follows:

B) Recapitulation (from the above page):

a) Spring 52: Paul's trip to Jerusalem from Corinth (fourteen years (Gal2:1) after the one in 38). The "council" of Jerusalem takes place then.
b) Summer and early fall 52 (or earlier): Paul spends time in Antioch (dispute with Peter: Gal2:11-14) and departs (alone).
c) Fall 52 to winter 53: Paul becomes sick on his way NW and recuperates in "northern" Galatia where he makes converts (Gal4:13-15; Ac18:23,19:1a).
d) Winter 53: Paul's arrival in Ephesus. He learns Apollos & Peter had visited Corinth and each one got followers at his detriment (1Co1-4).
e) Winter 53 to spring 55: Paul preaches in Ephesus for two years and three months (Ac19:8,10). He feels partially abandoned by the Corinthians (1Co9). But, later, the situation improves greatly.
f) Spring 55: Paul's trip to Macedonia and then Corinth (2nd one here: 1Co16:5-8; 2Co13:1-2), where Paul is rejected. Likely no collection (as planned in 1Co16:1-4) is done.
g) Summer 55 to spring 56: Paul stays in Ephesus (about nine months).
h) Spring 56: Paul's short trip to Troas and Macedonia (where Paul hears the good news from Titus) then back to Ephesus (2Co1:15-24,7:5-7). Meanwhile a collection is started in Corinth (2Co8:10b-11).
i) Late spring 56: The "riot" in Ephesus.
j) Late spring 56 to fall 57: Paul is imprisoned in Ephesus. The collection in Corinth is aborted (2Co8:10b-11).
k) Fall 57: Paul is freed and goes to Macedonia (probably Philippi first).
l) Fall 57 to early spring 58: Paul visits the Macedonian Christians and then stays in Corinth (for three months (Ac20:3a); the third trip to that city). The collection is restarted and completed in Corinth (Ro15:26).
m) Late spring 58: Paul's arrival in Jerusalem and arrest (Ro15:25-26,31; Ac20,21)

Notes:
a) The NIV Study Bible (introduction to 'Romans') does not account for any prison term in Ephesus. But it stipulates 'Romans' was written in early spring of 57. That was before Paul's trip to Jerusalem and after a collection in Macedonia and Achaia (I agree with this context), during a three months winter stay in Corinth (Ac20:3). Consequently, a dating of 56 for the "riot" in Ephesus would be implied.
b) The NIV Study Bible is also in agreement for the start of the third missionary journey of Paul (in Ephesus) in early 53. Then the three years of Paul's preaching in Ephesus mentioned in Ac20:31 would bring us to 56 and the "riot".

3.5 The conclusion:

The first persecution in Jerusalem happened in 35 (likely in the spring), seven years after Jesus' crucifixion. Is it a coincidence?
The "riot" in Ephesus occurred in 56 (likely in the spring), twenty eight years (seven multiplied by four) after Jesus' crucifixion. Is it a coincidence?
The persecution happened after the believers suddenly multiplied:
Ac6:1 "Now in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying,"
and
Ac6:7 "Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith."
The "riot" was initiated by silversmiths, making statues of pagan deities (mostly Diana/Artemis) and noticing a drop in their business, due to people converting massively to Christianity:
Ac19:24-26a "For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, who made silver shrines of Diana, brought no small profit to the craftsmen. He called them together with the workers of similar occupation, and said: "men, you know that we have our prosperity by this trade. Moreover you see and hear that not only at Ephesus, but throughout almost all Asia, this Paul has persuaded and turned away many people, ..."
Right before that (spring of 56), when Paul arrived in Troas (150 miles north of Ephesus), and to his surprise, he found a Christian community there (2Co2:12). Probably also by that time, many Christian communities throughout Asia Minor, like Colosse and Laodicea, had sprung in a very short time.

The odds that both separate events happened, each one of the two, at one particular year out of seven are:
1/7 X 1/7 = 1/49, that is about 2 chances out of 100.
And if we take in account that both events likely happened in the spring, after a sudden upsurge in the number of converts in the preceding months:
1/4 X 1/4 = 1/16 then 1/16 X 1/49 = Less than 1.5 chance out of 1000

So it is very unlikely these two happenings occurred at random, without a common event (Jesus' crucifixion) indirectly acting as "synchronization".

And then, there is more.
In Ac12:1-19, a persecution is mentioned against the "Nazarenes" in Jerusalem:
"It was about this time that King Herod
[Agrippa I, a protege of emperors Caius and Claudius. Agrippa ruled over most of Palestine from the spring of 41 to his death about three years later]
` arrested some who belonged to the church, intending to persecute them. He had James, the brother of John, put to death with the sword. When he saw that this pleased the Jews, he proceeded to seize Peter also. This happened during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. After arresting him, he put him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him out for public trial after the Passover." (Ac12:1-4)
The most likely date is 42: in the early spring of 41, Agrippa was probably still in Rome, advising and helping Claudius, the new emperor (Ant., Bk XIX, Ch IV & V). Also, it was too early to travel safely by ship. And as for 43, Josephus tells us that Agrippa spent the latter part of his reign away from Jerusalem (Ant., XIX, VII, 4 & 5, and Chapter VIII).
Of course, 42 is 28 + (2 X 7) and it was around Passover. A coincidence?
"Now about that time ..." (Ac12:1), the church of Antioch was going through rapid growth:
Ac11:20-24 "But some of them were men from Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they had come to Antioch, spoke to the [Gentile] Hellenists, preaching the Lord Jesus. ... and a great number believed ... Then news of these things came to the ears of the church in Jerusalem, and they sent out Barnabas to go as far as Antioch. When he came ..., he was glad, and encouraged them all that with purpose of heart they should continue with the Lord. ... And a great many people were added to the Lord."
That was just before:
Ac11:25-26b "Then Barnabas departed for Tarsus to seek Saul [Paul]. And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. ..."
In 2Co12:1-10, in order to explain that, despite his weaknesses, he was chosen to be Christ's apostle, Paul describes a former vision of fourteen years ago. As I explained in"Paul's third journey", this passage was written in the spring of 56; that sets the alleged vision in 42. And, logically, it makes sense the revelation would happen right before Paul started his apostolic career (according to Ac11:25-26)!
I acknowledge I might be walking on thin ice here, but there is still a good probability Paul moved to Antioch in early 42, right after "a great many people [here] were added to the Lord." (Ac11:24)
And regarding Antioch (where Christianity started after 35), that would take care of my aforementioned presupposition:
"At the first occurrence of an "anniversary" in a new Christian area ... many people who thought about joining (to be on the safe side!) would do so in crowds."

There is still more: according to Suetonius, as in 'The Lives of the Twelve Caesars', we have this enigmatic passage in the section about Claudius:
25.4 "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome."
The author of 'Acts' makes mention of this same expulsion, which occurred in 49 according to the fourth/fifth century church father Orosius.
Ac18:2 "[at the end of 50] There he [Paul] met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome."
Aquila and Priscilla seem to have been converted prior to meeting Paul.
"Chrestus" is a suitable Greek name, so there may have been an agitator/messianic pretender among the Jews of Rome by the name of Chrestus. But then "Chrestus" could be a misspelling of "Christus" and "at the instigation of Chrestus" might signify the presence (in growing number) of early Jewish Christians there, which created disputes with the other Jews.
And then again, 49 is 28 + (7 X 3), another coincidence!

Note: Suetonius also makes mention of Nero's persecution in 16.2: "Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition."

Here is a visual recapitulation of the years in question (in red and mauve). The years in bold indicate "ministry" years, first the ones of Jesus (part of 27-28), then the ones of Paul (2nd & 3rd journeys: 50-58)

Note: for the Jews then, (fall to fall) 27-28, 34-35, 41-42, 48-49 & 55-56 were likely Sabbatical years. During their one-year period, it was probably one more reason for expecting a great (divine) event.

4. Overall conclusion:

According to the discussions in Appendices A & B, with Paul's third journey, I think we have enough evidence (and a lot more than for any crucifixion in 30 or 33 or 36, when Vitellius, the president of Syria, visited Jerusalem during the Passover) to ascertain that Jesus was crucified in the spring of 28.

3.10 The false ending:

1) Jn20:30-31a "And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may ..."
Comment: if up to that point, "many other signs" "are not written in this book", why is one of those "unwritten" ones (the miraculous fishing 21:6-11) written afterwards?

2) Jn21:24 "This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true."
Comment: one of the "we" wrote the "epilogue". But the rest of the gospel is suggested written (earlier) by someone else.

3) Jn20:30-31 "And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name."
Comment: the two verses preceding the "epilogue" look to have been a conclusion for the whole gospel.

Proposed solution: the "epilogue" (21:1-25ff) was written some time after the rest, and by a different author.

Notes:
a) The "epilogue" has synoptic affinities which do not show in Jn1-20, such as the 'sons of Zebedee' (Jn21:2) and the disciples' fishing (Jn21:1-3). Twenty-eight words in the "epilogue" do not appear elsewhere in GJohn, but they do in GMark & GLuke.
b) The epilogue did not show in all copies of GJohn at the end of the 2nd century and beginning of the 3rd. This is according to:
- Irenaeus' Against Heresies (175-185), IIII,14,3 "All things of the following kind we have known through Luke alone (and numerous actions of the Lord we have learned through him, which also all notice): the multitude of fishes which Peter's companions enclosed, when at the Lord's command they cast the nets[Irenaeus did not seem to be aware of Jn21:6,11. And nowhere in his works did he mention anything from Jn21] ..."
- Tertullian's Against Praxeas (200-220), XXXV,17-18 "Wherefore also does this Gospel, at its very termination, intimate that these things were ever written, if it be not, to use its own words, "that ye might believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God" [Jn20:31] ?" (but in 'A Treatise on the Soul' 50, Tertullian was then aware of Jn21)

4. Luke's gospel and GJohn:

4.1 The anointment in Bethany, on the feet, by Mary (with Martha), with wiping by means of her hair (Jn12:1-8):
It is a conflation of:
a) Lk10:38-42: at the home of "Martha" and her sister "Mary" (but NOT specified in Bethany, and NO anointment here)
b) Mk14:3-8: when "reclining at the table", anointment in "Bethany" by a woman, with "pure nard", an "expensive perfume" (but NOT on the feet (on the head instead), NO "Martha" and "Mary", and NO wiping with the woman's hair)
c) Lk7:36-38: a woman "poured it on Jesus' feet and wiped his feet with her hair" (but NOT specified in Bethany, and NO "Martha" and "Mary", and NO "pure nard")

Conclusion: "John" had to know both gospels then.
'The anointment in Bethany' was inserted after GLuke became known.

Notes:
A) Could "Luke" have extracted items from GMark & GJohn when writing 10:38-42 & 7:36-38? That can be debated but highly unlikely, more so because the woman of Luke's anointment is not named. And if "John" knew of 'Acts' before his gospel was released, that would remove the possibility "Luke" was aware of GJohn when writing GLuke (considering 'Acts' was written after the later gospel).
B) Let's notice other similarities between GMark & GJohn:
Mk14:4-8 ""Why was this fragrant oil wasted? For it might have been sold for more than three hundred denarii and given to the poor." And they criticized her sharply. But Jesus said, "... Let her alone. Why do you trouble her? She has done a good work for Me. For you have the poor with you always, and whenever you wish you may do them good; but Me you do not have always. She has done what she could. She has come beforehand to anoint My body for burial.""
Jn12:5-8 ""Why was this fragrant oil not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?" ... But Jesus said, "Let her alone; she has kept this for the day of My burial. For the poor you have with you always, but Me you do not have always.""

Remarks:
a) GMatthew (& GLuke) has NO mention of "three hundred denarii".
b) In GMark (14:3-9), the whole flask is emptied (by a woman) on Jesus' body (naked? If not, the oil would drip on the clothes!), by pouring it on his head (how would that work???), all of that in order to prepare him (still alive!) for burial several days before the crucifixion!!! "John" avoided these absurdities and the perfume is suggested (see bolded italics), for the most part, kept for the day of burial. It seems here "John" was trying to "correct" a very flawed (& highly unrealistic, therefore fictional) passage of GMark. Let's also notice this woman and/or what remains of her oily perfume are not involved in Jesus' burial (Jn19:38-42). Why? Because the later was written earlier (Version M)!

C) In GLuke (7:36-50), the anointment is performed when Jesus goes towards Jerusalem (but before he reaches Jericho). In GMark (14:3-9), it is done after the "triumphal entry". In GJohn (12:2-8), it happens in between, that is one day before Jesus is welcome in the holy city.
D) In GMark, the anointment is in Simon the Leper's house (14:3). In GLuke, it occurs (but very differently) in the home of a Pharisee named Simon (7:39-40). Did "John" get his cue from "Simon" and then proceeded to combine the two stories into one?

4.2 Jesus resurrects Lazarus (11:1-57):
Another passage featuring "Martha" and her sister "Mary" is 'Jesus resurrects Lazarus'.
Furthermore, let's note there is no mention of any Lazarus' resurrection story in the other gospels. However in GJohn, this alleged event is paramount. It explains the triumphal welcome:
Jn12:17-19 "Therefore the people, who were with Him when He called Lazarus out of his tomb and raised him from the dead, bore witness. For this reason the people also met Him, because they heard that He had done this sign.
The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, "You see that you are accomplishing nothing. Look, the world has gone after Him!"
It also starts the plot to kill Jesus (Jn11:45-50). Then, why did the three synoptic gospels NOT report on something so much public & important?

Note: the name 'Lazarus' appears in GLuke, as the beggar in a parable (Lk16:19-31).

The original GJohn did not have any story about the earthly Jesus resurrecting anyone. GMark features one (the little girl of Jairus Mk5:22-43), but the disciples (and parents) are told to keep it secret (against the fondness of "John" for widely witnessed signs!):
Mk5:43a "But He commanded them strictly that no one should know it, ..."
However, GLuke has a very public resurrection observed by crowd and disciples (the widow's son in Nain Lk7:11-17):
Lk7:14b-15a YLT "... He said, "young man, to thee I say, arise."And the dead sat up ..."
Let's notice here some similarities with Lazarus' resurrection narrative:
Jn11:43b-44a YLT "... He cried out , "Lazarus, come forth!" And he who had died came forth ..."

Conclusion: because of "Martha" & "Mary" and some similarities with GLuke 7:11-17, 'Jesus resurrects Lazarus' (11:1-57) and also 'Lazarus is remembered' (12:17-19) were added on after GLuke appeared.

4.3 The Samaritan woman (4:1-42):
Two of the main characteristics of GLuke are its pro-women and pro-Samaritan stances.
On the former, I urge you to consult this page where I listed all my (many) arguments proving the point. Here, my main conclusion is that "Luke" was a Christian woman from Philippi, addressing a community traditionally led by women.
On this other page, I explained Luke's interest with Samaritans: they were used as substitutes for Gentiles (the later not known to have been preached by Jesus).

Then what do we have in 'the Samaritan woman' passage?
a) A friendly one to one conversation, with the Samaritan woman looking more and more like a Gentile Christian convert. It is also stressed here the Samaritans are NOT Jews:
Jn4:9 "... "How is it that You, being a Jew, ask a drink from me, a Samaritan woman?" For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans."
Jn4:20 "Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem ..."
b) Many other Samaritans rally around Jesus (and become Christians!):
Jn4:39-42 "And many of the Samaritans of that city believed in Him ... So when the Samaritans had come to Him, they urged Him to stay with them; and He stayed there two days. And many more believed because of His own word. Then they said to the woman, ... we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.""

It looks "John" used the same stratagem as "Luke" did, by featuring Samaritans as non-Jews (= Gentiles). What a contrast with the rest of the gospel where Jesus meets disbelief and hostility from the Jews at large! And with the Samaritans, there is no need for performing sign(s) to attract their attention!
The main point of the Samaritan episode is as follows:
If Jesus had dealt with Gentiles, instead of those "stubborn" Jews, he would have been believed, as he (allegedly) did with the Samaritans!
Furthermore, "Luke" gave the impression, that in order to go from Galilee to Jerusalem (Judea), one has to go through Samaria (which is not true):
Lk9:51b-52a "... Jesus resolutely set out for Jerusalem. And he sent messengers on ahead, who went into a Samaritan village ..."
And in GJohn, we have:
Jn4:3-4 "He left Judea and departed again to Galilee. But He needed to go through Samaria."

Conclusion: because of the aforementioned and 3.2, 'the Samaritan woman' was added on after GLuke got known.

Note: "John" (and his community) did not seem to know about GMatthew: 
Mt10:5 "These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.""

4.4 The nobleman's son (4:43-53):
This story is very similar to the one of the centurion's servant in Lk7:2-10:
a) The healing is performed remotely.
b) The healing occurs in Capernaum.
c) The master/father is someone with authority.
Note: 'nobleman' is also translated by 'royal official'.
Why would a centurion be replaced by a royal official?
It did not make any sense for a foreign (as implied in Lk7:5, presumably Roman) centurion to have a house in Capernaum. Galilee, ruled by a client king, was not even under direct Roman control.

Conclusion: because of some similarities with GLuke, but mostly due to 3.2 (confirmed by 4.3), 'the nobleman's son' was added later.

4.5 Jesus and John the Baptist (3:22-36):
Jn1:25-26a "And they asked him, saying, "Why then do you baptize if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?" John answered them, saying, "I baptize with water, ..."
John the Baptist (JohnB) has already been introduced as NOT Christ, NOT Elijah and NOT the Prophet. His baptizing is on his own decision, NOT responding to God's call. Furthermore, he declared already his great inferiority compared to Christ:
Jn1:27 "It is He who, coming after me, is preferred before me, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose."

Then why bother going to another session (Jn3:26-31) like the last one (Jn1:15-27)?
Jn3:28 "You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, 'I am not the Christ,' but, 'I have been sent before Him.'"
Jn3:30-31a "He must increase, but I must decrease. He who comes from above is above all ..."
But there is more: Jesus is baptizing too, and beating JohnB at his own game:
Jn3:26 "And they came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, He [Jesus] who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified; behold, He is baptizing, and all are coming to Him!""
Why this second passage about JohnB, downgrading him even further?
It may have been caused by the author's reaction against:
Lk3:15 "Now as the people were in expectation, and all reasoned in their hearts about John, whether he was the Christ or not"
Lk3:15 may have renewed beliefs in the community about JohnB as the Christ, that the author wanted to extinguish!

Conclusion: because of my last comment and the repetitions (with Jn1:19-26), 'Jesus and John the Baptist' was added on later.

4.6 Jesus reappears to Mary Magdalene and the disciples (20:11-23):

1) Let's consider first the reappearance to the disciples:
Jn20:19-21a "Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you." When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. So Jesus said to them again, "Peace to you! ...""
Comment: let's notice the similarities (& differences) with the first part of Luke's apparition to the disciples:
Lk24:36-39a "Now as they said these things, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, "Peace to you." But they were terrified and frightened, and supposed they had seen a spirit. And He said to them, "Why are you troubled? And why do doubts arise in your hearts? Behold My hands and My feet ..."" (the words in italics may be an interpolation because not showing in some ancient manuscripts)

Furthermore, in the same passage:
Lk24:49a "Behold, I send [notice the present tense] the Promise of My Father upon you;
[there is no prior mention (& identification) of this "Promise". But "upon [someone]" is associated with the Holy Spirit in Lk1:35,2:25,3:22,4:18. Also the "Promise" could be a reference to Joel2:28-29 "... I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; ...And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days [before the"day of the Lord" (2:31)]." (as quoted in Ac2:17-18)] ..."
Comment: it does seem here the Spirit is delivered to the disciples "on the spot". And "John", not knowing of 'Acts' and the Pentecost event, had also the Holy Spirit given to the disciples right away:
Jn20:21b-22 ""... As the Father has sent Me, I also send you." And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit ...""

2) Even if the resurrected Jesus does not appear first to women in GLuke, the reappearance (the first one in GJohn) to Mary Magdalene fits well with the pro-woman stance of the third gospel. Here, let's also notice the status of MaryM is enhanced (Lk8:2). There are also some similarities with 'Jesus and the two disciples on the road to Emmaus' passage (Lk24:13-34), the first narrated reappearance in GLuke:
a) At first, Jesus is thought to be a stranger (Lk24:16, Jn20:14,15a).
b) They/she hurry(ies) to the disciples with the (good) news (Lk24:33,35, Jn20:18).

Notes:
a) At the empty tomb, there is one angel in GMark (16:5-7) and GMatthew (28:2-7), but there are two angels in GLuke (24:4-7) and GJohn (20:12-13). This is an additional indication "John" knew then about Luke's gospel.
b) Mary Magdalene appears abruptly in Jn19:25 & Jn20:1, without any description about her. Would that suggest this woman was already known in John's community through GMark (15:40-41) and GLuke (8:1-3), and consequently not requiring a presentation? More so when we consider "John" did not mention why this Mary would know about the (correct) tomb (but GMark (15:47) & GLuke (23:55) explained it!).

Conclusion: because of similarities with GLuke, and also of 3.4, 'Jesus reappears to Mary Magdalene and the disciples' was added on later.

Note: how to explain the later inclusion of women in GJohn?
It appears the original version had Jn2:4-5 as the only passage where Jesus is dealing with a woman, here his own mother:
Jn2:4a "Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me?"
With "woman", the author intended to show that Jesus, as an immortal divine entity, considers his mother as a mortal female, the equivalent of the ninety-three "son of man" in 'Ezekiel'.
However, many Christian women then might have not known about the theological subtlety, and consequently disliked the whole gospel and its "Jesus": any mother would consider an insult to be called "woman" by her son!
Then came GLuke, with its pro-Mary & pro-woman stances, which must have appealed to the local female believers, another good reason for them to reject GJohn.
However, it seems "John" tried later to remedy to the initial "faux pas":
a) In Jn20:13, MaryM is called "woman" by angels, as to reiterate the theological connotation of "woman", as said by a heavenly entity.
b) In Jn20:15-16 MaryM is also addressed as "woman" by the resurrected Jesus, but next he calls her "Mary". Then MaryM says "Rabboni" (dear teacher), seemingly not offended by "woman"!
c) Jn20:17b "... 'I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.'"
Here the status of MaryM, a woman, is elevated to the one of the Son of God himself!
d) In the 'below the cross' passage (Jn19:25-27), Jesus addresses his mother again as "woman", but immediately after "lowers" himself by declaring he is her son:
Jn19:26b-27a "He said to His mother, "Woman, behold your son!" Then He said to the ["beloved"] disciple, "Behold your mother!""
Here, Jesus assigns Mary to his best disciple, proving he cares about his mother, even if he keeps calling her "woman"!
Because of the aforementioned, and also the presence of two other women, I think Jn19:25:27 is "post-Lukan" and was not part of the original gospel.
Furthermore, in GMark (or GMatthew & GLuke), there is no mention of family members or disciples witnessing the crucifixion.

5. 'Acts' and GJohn:

5.1 Jesus reappears to Thomas and again to the other disciples (20:24-31):
In this short passage, there are three things which appear here, but are not in GLuke but present (or suggested) in 'Acts':

a) The long reappearance period:
The second reappearance to the disciples (with Thomas this time) happened one week after the first one. However the impression given by GLuke24:36-49 is that the reappearance to the disciples was short. And immediatly after, Jesus (and company) goes towards Bethany and he ascends to heaven: no second reappearance possible one week later!
However in 'Acts', we have, and before the ascension occurs (again!):
Ac1:3 "to whom [the apostles] He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God."
That would open the possibility for a second reappearance to the disciples (including Thomas) one week later!

b) Other signs during the reappearance period:
Jn20:30 "And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples ['disciples' for "John" means members of the twelve and other close followers/believers], which are not written in this book;"
Comment: isn't it reminiscent of "presented ... many infallible proofs [to his "apostles" (1:2), during the forty days after his first reappearance]", from Ac1:3, previously quoted?
Let's note also these latter signs are performed amidst the disciples only, not among other (unfriendly) Jews as before the crucifixion. Once again, this is very much according to:
Ac10:40-41 "Him God raised up on the third day, and showed Him openly, not to all the people, but to witnesses chosen before by God, even to us [the eleven] who ate and drank with Him ..."

c) Jesus nailed on the cross (a weak point, I concede):
Jn20:25 "... Unless I [Thomas] see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, ..."
Let's consider:
Ac2:23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified [affixed], and put to death;"
The Greek word for "crucified", which normally (according to Paul's letter and the gospels) would have been used here, is replaced by a derivation from PROSPHGNUMI "fastened/affixed", which occurs only here in the N.T. Nailing is not necessarily inferred even if some bibles (such as the NIV & NASB) do translate it as "nailed" (on the cross).

Notes: 
a) "On the cross" does not appear in the Greek, just "affixed".
b) The "thrust" of "affixed" is on the fastening (of Jesus on the cross) and not on the long process of crucifixion -- including going through an excruciating agony and finally dying -- as "crucified" entails. Actually, the dying is covered by "put to death [or slain]"
Therefore, there is some probability "John" would have gone one step further from the "affixed" of 'Acts' and postulated "nailed".

Conclusion: because of the previous discussion, and also from 3.5 & 3.8, 'Jesus reappears to Thomas and again to the other disciples' was added on later, after 'Acts' became known.

5.2 Miscellaneous:
In other parts of GJohn, other clues suggest "John" knew then about 'Acts':

a) The visible ascension:
Jn6:62 "[to his disciples] What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before [in heaven]?"
Here is a clear indication of the ascension (not mentioned in GMark & GMatthew).
In Lk24:50-53, it is not specified the disciples see the ascension, narrated briefly as "He was parted from them and carried up into heaven". But in 'Acts', they do see it:
Ac1:9 "... they [the disciples] watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight."
Furthermore, Jn6:62 appears to be an inserted digression, not related at all to the main topic.

b) Jesus as the Judge:
Unlike Paul's letters, 'Hebrews', 'James', GMark, GLuke (but not GMatthew), 'Acts' features Jesus as the Judge:
Ac10:42 "... He [Jesus] who was ordained by God to be Judge of the living and the dead."
Jesus as the Judge also appears in a small section of GJohn:
Jn5:22 "For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son,"
Jn5:27 "[the Father] has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man."
Jn5:30 "... As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, ..."
However somewhere else:
Jn12:48 "He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him; the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day."
Here, it is not Jesus who will judge "in the last day", but "the word that I have spoken", suggesting Jn5:22-30 was written later. Furthermore, it does not appear Jesus would be the Judge in this verse:
Jn8:50 "And I do not seek My own glory; there is One who seeks and judges"

Note: Jesus will judge and raise the dead (5:25-30):
As discussed before, this small passage includes 'Jesus as the Judge', but also:
Jn5:25 "Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live."
Jn5:28-29 "Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth; those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation."

Conclusion: because of the previous discussion, and also 3.9, 'Jesus will judge and raise the dead' was added on later, after GLuke was known, and then after 'Acts' appeared. Please also note the raising of Lazarus cleared the way for 'Jesus raising the dead'.

5.3 Jesus reappears to some disciples in Galilee (21:1-25):
The author of the epilogue did not know (or rejected) 'Acts':

a) Jn21:14 "This is now the third time Jesus showed Himself to His disciples after He was raised from the dead."
In 'Acts', Jesus shows himself many times to his disciples during a forty days period:
Ac1:3 "to whom [the disciples] He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God."
b) In Jn21:15-17, Peter is chosen as the shepherd of Jesus' flock, when himself and some disciples are back to Galilee and fishing (complying with Jn16:32, the disowning & dispersion home).
However in 'Acts', the church of Jerusalem is started by Peter, with himself as the leader, before the disciples have a chance to go back to Galilee (which is never mentioned in 'Acts').

Conclusion: because of 3.10 and the aforementioned comments, the "epilogue", 'Jesus reappears to some disciples in Galilee', can be confirmed to have been written some time after the rest, and by a different author. This author did not know (or rejected) 'Acts' (but certainly he was aware of GLuke & its miraculous fishing 5:1-11).