Next, let's move to the idea that Hillel "moved" any holiday at all.
You (PeaceCrusader) have shown no evidence that any of the Jewish holidays were ever celebrated on any date other than where they are celebrated today. You've made a couple of attempts, but all those attempts have shown is that you don't really understand Jewish customs. For example, your assertion that Constantine's letter proved that sometimes Passover was celbrated in January, and next in December, proved that you didn't understand the custom, both ancient and modern, of celebrating Passover twice, just to be sure.
On the other hand, even though you haven't provided evidence, you have provided reasoning. Unfortunately, your reasoning is flawed as well. You assert that Hanukah had to be moved in order to not conflict with Sukkot. However, why is that? You have asserted that the "dedication" referred to in the holiday's name is actually the dedication of the first temple. You have shown, quite satisfactorily, that this first dedication took place at Sukkot.
In the centuries between the dedication of the first temple and the calendar reform, when is it that you think the dedication was celebrated? The Bible says the temple was dedicated at Sukkot. Is it your contention that, several centuries after the dedication, when the Babylonian style calendar was adopted, that Sukkot was moved to the new style calendar, but that the feast of dedication, which had been on Sukkot, was retained in the purely lunar calendar? And then later, when the purely lunar calendar was finally removed once and for all, Hillel knew that the original dedication had been at Sukkot, but it wouldn't be right to move the dedication feast to Sukkot (apparently since there was no temple? I didn't follow that.) so they made up a different holiday associated with the second temple and the Maccabees, and moved that holiday to the 25 of Kislev.
I'm really not following this.
When they moved some holidays out of the purely lunar calendar into the lunisolar calendar, did they have any criteria for which ones would be moved?
Next up, that holiday mentioned in John, which was the Feast of Dedication, in winter. As we have seen, it doesn't actually say Feast of Dedication in the Bible. It says Feast of Renewal. What holiday was that?
Presumably, Hanukah. It would make sense. After all, what was being celebrated at that holiday (in the conventional histories acceped by non-amaic scholars) was the renewal of Jewish worship at the temple. The translators into English were probably correct to say it was Hanukah, and translate the word Hanukah into English as "dedication". However, there is another possibility. it is at least conceivable that the "Feast of Renewal" was a new year's feast. Judaism actually has four new years. One of them, the "new year of trees" is Tu B'shvat, observed every year on the fifteenth of Shvat. It is conceivable that this was the actual holiday referred to by John as the "Feast of Renewal". It doesn't seem all that likely, but it could be.
Finally, to go back to another point you made earlier, could you explain what evidence that the day after the Lord's ascension was the Feast of Tabernacles, and how the apostles' state of sobriety at 9:00 am provides evidence of this? It was confusing to me.
