What Day was Jesus Crucified?

[fallingblood]

What you have described are ' jewish practices ' and not at all what is being taught in the NT.Since you are 2000 years behind in new knowledge you can hardly expect us to listen to you. :no:

Incorrect. Granted there was a division between Christianity and Judaism, but Jesus taught, nor did any of the other disciples, as far as we can tell, anything new about Passover. The NT teaches nothing different about observing the Passover, as the teachings come from Judaism. So the Jewish practices are the practices that Jesus would have subscribed to.

To sum up, Jesus was a Jew. Jesus practiced and followed Judaism. Jesus at no time changed Passover. Thus, the Jewish practices are relevant here.

 

[fallingblood]

If the blind lead the blind both fall into the ditch.:cover:

Maybe, but if someone who has accurate eyesight leads the blind, they will get to where they are going.

 

[Beta]

That only assumes that what is taught in the NT is legitimate knowledge. Since you are making up knowledge to reflect your personal beliefs, rather than what God commanded the Jews in the Five Books of Moses, you can hardly be expect us to listen to you.
See how that works?

Much in the NT has come from the OT and it would work if people believed what it says including Jews and Gentiles.Again I say that both have made huge mistakes and followed error.
Btw , God gave the law to the children of Israel - a mixed multitude coming out of Egypt - and not the Jews only.

 

[Poisonshady313]

What you have described are ' jewish practices ' and not at all what is being taught in the NT.Since you are 2000 years behind in new knowledge you can hardly expect us to listen to you. :no:

Are you Ashton Kutcher? Are you punking this forum? Or are you really that dense?


Passover is a Jewish holiday. That's exactly what we've been talking about for the past 20 pages. All this discussion about which day of Nisan was the preparation day, or the passover, or the festival of unleavened bread... this is all Jewish practices. Someone working on 2000 year old knowledge is the only person you should be listening to.

 

[Beta]

Maybe, but if someone who has accurate eyesight leads the blind, they will get to where they are going.

YOU obviously claim better eye-sight than God . Such pride will not be left unpunished.:no:

 

[Poisonshady313]

YOU obviously claim better eye-sight than God . Such pride will not be left unpunished.:no:

Not better than God. Better than you.

 

[Beta]

Are you Ashton Kutcher? Are you punking this forum? Or are you really that dense?


Passover is a Jewish holiday. That's exactly what we've been talking about for the past 20 pages. All this discussion about which day of Nisan was the preparation day, or the passover, or the festival of unleavened bread... this is all Jewish practices. Someone working on 2000 year old knowledge is the only person you should be listening to.

Not saying you haven't got SOME things right but by no means as much as you claim. Learn to be humble and admit error when you make it.

 

[Beta]

Not better than God. Better than you.

Your opinion !

 

[Harmonious]

Much in the NT has come from the OT

Or, rather, bad translations of the OT.

and it would work if people believed what it says including Jews and Gentiles.

Not really. The more I've read the Christian scriptures, the less integrity I find in it.

There is no reason Jews and Christians can't get along, but Judaism isn't Christianity, and the NT holds no appeal to Torah-true Jews, except as a reference to what Christians believe.

Again I say that both have made huge mistakes and followed error.

You are free to believe what you will.

Btw , God gave the law to the children of Israel - a mixed multitude coming out of Egypt - and not the Jews only.

No - the Erev Rav, or hangers-on who were not specifically born from the Jews (meaning from ALL twelve tribes) did NOT receive an inheritance in the Land of Israel. Those who converted were welcome to BE Jews, but they didn't get a tribe. (Then as now.)

The people who left Egypt who were part of Israel WERE Jews, or were non-Jews who accepted that they would live along side of Jews, but not be a PART of the Jews unless they converted properly.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Not saying you haven't got SOME things right but by no means as much as you claim.

By all means, as much as I claim.

Learn to be humble and admit error when you make it.

You would do well to follow your own advice. As for myself, I'm plenty willing to admit error when I make it. I just haven't made any in this thread.

 

[Beta]

Incorrect. Granted there was a division between Christianity and Judaism, but Jesus taught, nor did any of the other disciples, as far as we can tell, anything new about Passover. The NT teaches nothing different about observing the Passover, as the teachings come from Judaism. So the Jewish practices are the practices that Jesus would have subscribed to.

To sum up, Jesus was a Jew. Jesus practiced and followed Judaism. Jesus at no time changed Passover. Thus, the Jewish practices are relevant here.

Jesus could not have followed judaism implicitly since he found so much fault with them. I am not saying he changed Passover but changes were made which the Pharisees and Sadducees did not approve of and had Jesus killed for them. So everything in the garden was not lovely and has led to a deep division.

 

[fallingblood]

YOU obviously claim better eye-sight than God . Such pride will not be left unpunished.:no:

What are you talking about? Maybe you should read the posts in context.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Jesus could not have followed judaism implicitly since he found so much fault with them. I am not saying he changed Passover but changes were made which the Pharisees and Sadducees did not approve of and had Jesus killed for them. So everything in the garden was not lovely and has led to a deep division.

He didn't find fault in Judaism. He EXPLICITLY, according to your NT scriptures, said that the Law MUST be followed and anyone teaching contrary would not be accepted into the kingdom of "God"....

 

[fallingblood]

Jesus could not have followed judaism implicitly since he found so much fault with them. I am not saying he changed Passover but changes were made which the Pharisees and Sadducees did not approve of and had Jesus killed for them. So everything in the garden was not lovely and has led to a deep division.

The Romans had Jesus killed, not the Jews. The idea that the Jews killed Jesus is ridiculous, and has resulted in 2,000 years of brainless anti-semitism. Again, the Romans killed Jesus. The Jews had nothing to do with it.

More so, there were more than just Pharisees and Sadducees during that time. Most likely, Jesus did have a problem with the Sadducees. But there is little reason to assume there was a problem with the Pharisees, especially considering that vast amount of similarity there. And the Pharisees had little power during that time. Finally, there is reason for the Gospel writers to have a problem with the Pharisees though. The reason being that it was Rabbinic Judaism, which had a founding with the Pharisees, that pushed the Jesus movement away. There were definitely problems between the later Jesus movement and Rabbinic Judaism.

Again though, the Pharisees and Sadducees made up only a small amount of Judaism. And the Gospels give us no reason to assumed that Jesus had a problem with Judaism.

 

[Beta]

Or, rather, bad translations of the OT.
Not really. The more I've read the Christian scriptures, the less integrity I find in it.
There is no reason Jews and Christians can't get along, but Judaism isn't Christianity, and the NT holds no appeal to Torah-true Jews, except as a reference to what Christians believe.
You are free to believe what you will.
No - the Erev Rav, or hangers-on who were not specifically born from the Jews (meaning from ALL twelve tribes) did NOT receive an inheritance in the Land of Israel. Those who converted were welcome to BE Jews, but they didn't get a tribe. (Then as now.)
The people who left Egypt who were part of Israel WERE Jews, or were non-Jews who accepted that they would live along side of Jews, but not be a PART of the Jews unless they converted properly.

Not all Israel are Jews since the 12 sons did not all have the same mother. And besides that other people joined them and converted (perhaps not all) but the same laws applied to the converted (stranger) and the home-born Ex.12v49. Jews are always trying to exclude others then and now. In the NT it is GRACE that matters - not RACE, another reason they reject the NT Acts10v35. Is it any wonder there is no peace and unity among people and Jews are suffering so much punishment for their stubborn pride ? They are no longer and never have been the ONLY people God loves and scripture shows that. GOD wants us all to share and be equal ! :yes:

 

[fallingblood]

Not all Israel are Jews since the 12 sons did not all have the same mother. And besides that other people joined them and converted (perhaps not all) but the same laws applied to the converted (stranger) and the home-born Ex.12v49. Jews are always trying to exclude others then and now. In the NT it is GRACE that matters - not RACE, another reason they reject the NT Acts10v35. Is it any wonder there is no peace and unity among people and Jews are suffering so much punishment for their stubborn pride ? They are no longer and never have been the ONLY people God loves and scripture shows that. GOD wants us all to share and be equal ! :yes:

Jews are not a race.

Jews reject the NT because it has nothing to do with them. Jesus is not the Jewish Messiah, and thus, they have no need for him, or the teachings that revolve around him.

The suffering that some Jews have gone through has nothing to do with what you call stubborn pride. It is that type of ignorance that helped fuel anti-semitism, and the Holocaust.

Also, one can make an argument that the Old Testament also states that God loves everyone, not just the Jews. The story of Jonah is a great example.

Finally, your first statement is just ridiculous.

 

[Beta]

The Romans had Jesus killed, not the Jews. The idea that the Jews killed Jesus is ridiculous, and has resulted in 2,000 years of brainless anti-semitism. Again, the Romans killed Jesus. The Jews had nothing to do with it.

More so, there were more than just Pharisees and Sadducees during that time. Most likely, Jesus did have a problem with the Sadducees. But there is little reason to assume there was a problem with the Pharisees, especially considering that vast amount of similarity there. And the Pharisees had little power during that time. Finally, there is reason for the Gospel writers to have a problem with the Pharisees though. The reason being that it was Rabbinic Judaism, which had a founding with the Pharisees, that pushed the Jesus movement away. There were definitely problems between the later Jesus movement and Rabbinic Judaism.

Again though, the Pharisees and Sadducees made up only a small amount of Judaism. And the Gospels give us no reason to assumed that Jesus had a problem with Judaism.

That is how YOU see it friend but scripture says different.
Both Jews and Romans (Gentiles) had a hand in killing Jesus - both !!! Non of us are innocent when taken collectively.Given the time and circumstance we'd all have acted the same - even as did Adam and Eve hence the reason God concluded ALL under sin and in need of forgiveness and redemption.
Something to think on !!!

 

[outhouse]

Jesus could not have followed judaism implicitly since he found so much fault with them. I am not saying he changed Passover but changes were made which the Pharisees and Sadducees did not approve of and had Jesus killed for them. So everything in the garden was not lovely and has led to a deep division.

I was under the impression that jesus taught a hellenist judaism, he didnt change it but it evolved into its current state to not limit followers to judaism. This would have upset sadducees

 

[fallingblood]

That is how YOU see it friend but scripture says different.
Both Jews and Romans (Gentiles) had a hand in killing Jesus - both !!! Non of us are innocent when taken collectively.Given the time and circumstance we'd all have acted the same - even as did Adam and Eve hence the reason God concluded ALL under sin and in need of forgiveness and redemption.
Something to think on !!!

No need to think on it. The vast majority of Jews didn't care about Jesus one way or another. I would say that most Jews never even heard of him while he was alive. Simply, as far as we know, he made little to no impact when he was alive.

Crucifixion was a Roman form of execution. The Jews didn't crucify people. They had their own forms of corporeal punishment. Crucifixion was not one of them. More so, the Romans would have had no problem killing Jesus. He was just one more rabble rouser.

The fact is that most likely, the majority of people didn't care. He was just one more religious leader who was executed by Rome.

So no, very few people had a hand in the death of Jesus. And it wasn't the Jews who killed him.

 

[Harmonious]

Not all Israel are Jews since the 12 sons did not all have the same mother.

Please tell me you are not really doing this. You can't be that ignorant.

Yes, all twelve tribes (or thirteen, depending on how you are counting them) are all considered Jews, no matter their mothers were.

Yes. Reuben, Simeon, Levy, Judah, Yissachar, and Zevulun were from Leah. Dan and Naftali were from Bilhah. Gad and Asher were from Zilpah. And Joseph and Benjamin were from Rachel. Granted.

But once Israel was considered a nation, they were all Jews. In the Book of Esther, it is rather clear that Mordechi is from Benjamin, but he is called "Ish Yehudi", or a Jewish man.

It doesn't matter which tribe Jews are from, we are all Jews. Please don't insult your or my intelligence by trying to expound upon this further.

And besides that other people joined them and converted (perhaps not all) but the same laws applied to the converted (stranger) and the home-born Ex.12v49. Jews are always trying to exclude others then and now.

It's not so much that we are trying to exclude others, as much as realizing that others don't appreciate being what we are, and having our responsibilities.

If people are willing to put in the commitment necessary to BE Jewish, there is an option to convert. But if non-Jews have SEVEN commandments, and Jews have 613 (before Purim and Chanuka), unless a person WANTS to have the obligations that being a Jew entails, it is far easier for non-Jews to stay to the seven Noachide laws.

One of the main claims that is made by Christians is that it is "impossible" to keep Torah law. It isn't (and no matter how much we say that perfection was never expected, though we keep striving towards it), but when you consider how much people want to "get out" of doing it, it is a lot easier to make sure that people are good and ready to deal with everything.

Why should a person choose to obligate themselves to a commitment they don't intend to keep, and by accepting it but failing to apply one's self sin thereby, when if a person stayed not Jewish would have been doing what God commanded of them without sin, within the boundaries of non-Jewish law?

In the NT it is GRACE that matters - not RACE, another reason they reject the NT Acts10v35.

So you say... It is FAR more than "race," but if you are looking for a reason to cast aspersions on Jews being separate and apart from other nations, "race" is as logical as any other nonsense excuse.

Is it any wonder there is no peace and unity among people and Jews are suffering so much punishment for their stubborn pride ? They are no longer and never have been the ONLY people God loves and scripture shows that.

No one EVER said that Jews were the ONLY people God loves. However, Jews ARE chosen to be special, and (when we do what we're supposed to) be a light unto the nations. Only WE can do that.

GOD wants us all to share and be equal ! :yes:

No. God wants us to deal equitably and justly with each other. We can share, sure.

But we are NOT the same, and our obligations are NOT equal. Personally, we might be. I don't know.

But the Christian concept of Grace has nothing to do with me.