What Day was Jesus Crucified?

[fallingblood]

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.

Jesus limited followers to Judaism. He specifically told his disciples to teach to none by the Jews. Matthew is the most clear on this.

 

[Beta]

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"....

Jesus also fulfilled some of the laws on the cross so we are only left with keeping the spiritual law of the 10 Commandments Rom.7 and not the full 630 the Jews still believe in. Rejecting Jesus keeps them in that bind and they want to hold them over us still.

 

[Beta]

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

Jesus never tried to teach judaism but the Gospel of the Kingdom of God Mk.1v14,15.:yes:

 

[Beta]

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"....

As far as not finding fault with judaism why don't you read Mat.23 esp.v13. ?

 

[Beta]

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.
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?
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.
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.
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.

Your need for looong posts shows the human element that still figures greatly in jewish belief. Christ has released us from the useless baggage added in the OT that could never bring us salvation.
What is necessary now is a simplified form of obedience to keep the Word of God without the works of the law. Pity you can't see that yet. If you believed Jesus and read Mat.23 it might open your eyes.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Jesus also fulfilled some of the laws on the cross so we are only left with keeping the spiritual law of the 10 Commandments Rom.7 and not the full 630 the Jews still believe in. Rejecting Jesus keeps them in that bind and they want to hold them over us still.

This is your belief and I have no problem with that. I personally don't view it that way. He was clear on that issue. He, being a Jew, followed the law. Some Jews may say otherwise on that. From what I see in you 4 gospels...he was clear that the OT laws must be followed and anyone teaching contrary would not be accepted into "God's" kingdom.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

As far as not finding fault with judaism why don't you read Mat.23 esp.v13. ?

Then his problem is not with "Judaism" as you assert....it's with certain people/groups whom he deemed hypocrites (within) the religion of Judaism. So again, he explicitly followed the religion and said all of it must be followed and warned all who would come along teaching against it.

 

[smokydot]

God called to the light: "Day," and to the darkness He called: "Night." And there was evening and there was morning. One day.
Genesis 1:5
I had already gone over this... I forget if it was in this thread, or a few dozen others like it... but here it goes again.
We learn from the story of Moses going up the mountain for 40 days and 40 nights that it actually means 40 days and 40 nights... the people miscalculated Moses' return by only one day because Moses started his ascent during the daytime, and they counted that day. That was a mistake. They should have started counting when the sun fell on the day of his ascent, because that is the beginning of a calendar day.

And because they believed that a part of a day is counted as a whole day, the sin of the golden calf happened.

Do you have a Scriptural reference, which you could quote for me, that indicates the people miscalculated, based on counting part of a day as a day. . .and
that it was the reason the sin of the golden calf happened?
That is not in my OT text.

There is a significant difference between "third day" and "three days, three nights".

Yes, there is.

Again... in a thread that may include but is not limited to this one, I used the analogy of a baseball game.
If a guy says he's going to make a beer run after three innings, and he leaves during the third inning, he is a liar. He would have to leave at some point during the fourth. However, if he said he was going to make a beer run "in the third"... then he could go during either the top or the bottom of the third inning.
This whole "Jews reckoned a part of a day as a whole day" business is crap.

 

[smokydot]

No, the Gospel accounts all agree Jesus was put to death on Nisan 14, the Jewish Passover. The term Preparation can refer to the preparation made for the Sabbath, as at Mark 15:42.

As it-2 p. 583 explains, "This word seems to mark, not the day preceding Nisan 14, but the day preceding the weekly Sabbath, which, in this instance, was “a great one,” namely, not only a Sabbath by virtue of being Nisan 15, the first day of the actual Festival of Unfermented Cakes, but also a weekly Sabbath. This is understandable, since, as already stated, “Passover” was sometimes used to refer to the entire festival."​

Christ perfectly carried out the regulations of the Law, including the requirement to celebrate the Passover on Nisan 14. (Ex 12:6; Le 23:5; ) The day of Jesus’ trial and death could be viewed as the “preparation of the passover” in the sense that it was the preparation for the seven-day Festival of Unfermented Cakes that began the next day. Because of their closeness on the calendar, the entire festival itself was often included in the term “Passover.”
Rather than quickly concluding the Bible contradicts itself, a more thoughtful and thorough examination will most often lead to the conclusion Jesus made at John 17:17, where he said in prayer to God; "Sanctify them by means of the truth; your word is truth."

That's the way it is all laid out in post #212.

 

[smokydot]

You still haven't read John 18:28, or any of the posts by Poisonshady, which cleared this up.

How so? Please explain how you think this was cleared up.

 

[smokydot]

You're practicing ignorance and dismissive tactics. By saying ridiculous ideas do not make your argument any more sound. And ignoring the information that you've been given simply shows your arrogance.

Methinks the pot is calling the kettle black.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Methinks the pot is calling the kettle black.

Methinks that both should stick to cooking.

 

[smokydot]

maybe you didn't notice...

john 3:1 It was just before the Passover Festival. Jesus knew that the hour had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end.
2 The evening meal was in progress...

Review the nomenclature of the NT in post #212, where "Passover" can have three different meanings, and very seldom means just Nisan 14.

 

[smokydot]

And another thing. Here's a little word on what "between the evenings" mean:
in the afternoon: Heb. בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם From six hours [after sunrise] and onward is called בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם, literally, between the two evenings, for the sun is inclined toward the place where it sets to become darkened. It seems to me that the expression בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם denotes those hours between the darkening of the day and the darkening of the night. The darkening of the day is at the beginning of the seventh hour, when the shadows of evening decline, and the darkening of the night at the beginning of the night.
Exodus - Chapter 12 (Parshah Bo) - Exodus - Torah - Bible
6 hours from sunrise... assuming a 7:00 AM sunrise brings us to 1:00 PM. THE AFTERNOON!

The four quarters of a day would put it a little later.

 

[weirdpuckett]

Now, moving to John, we see a difference. John 19:14 "Now it was the day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon." The context of this verse is with Jesus' trial before Pilate. At this point, Jesus had already been flogged, and is now getting the verdict; he will be crucified, as stated in verse 16. So for John, is is the Day of Preparation for the Passover; or the day before Passover, that Jesus is crucified. Clearly, there is a disagreement here.

Noon being the "sixth hour" . . . therefore the "ninth hour" you mistakenly called " 9 in the morning" ( according to the Jewish day) is 3 in the afternoon . . . .so . . . .yeah . . . .

 

[smokydot]

You hold so much stock in your post #212 that I decided to take a look and address what you've mentioned.No, the Passover lamb was sacrificed and roasted in the evening of the 14th (before Mincha time) and it was eaten that evening which would have been the 15th of Nissan.
This is a concept that has been annoying me since I started reading this thread.
This day of preparation... Dude, if you actually understood what Jews DO in preparation for Passover, this would not be such an issue, except for those who wish to believe whatever they will to make their agenda of believing what they will about Jesus work.
On the 14th of Nissan, Jews have to stop eating Chametz, or simplistically, leavened bread. Thus, it is IN PREPARATION, yes, but it isn't a special holiday.
It is a day that the First Born Jews fast, in commemoration of the fact that the first born of the Egyptians died in the plague, but the Jews were NOT killed. It's still not a special holiday.
During Temple times, people brought their lambs for the Passover offering and the Chagiga offering to be slaughtered and processed before Mincha (afternoon daily offering and prayer service) on the 14th, so that they could be prepared for dinner that night, which would be the 15th.
If you want to say that "people made a day of it," as the whole day was spent in preparation for Passover, I'll buy that. (Which, frankly, makes Jesus' whole turning of the money-tables entirely unforgivable, and it is a sin Jesus committed that will forever make me despise the mention of the man.)
But no, it was never a special, separate holiday. It is only so in the hearts and minds of Christians who don't bother with what Jews ACTUALLY do, or HAVE done, but wish to continue to propagate misbegotten ideas that were spawned from bad translations to start with.
If the evidence is clear that Jesus ate the Passover meal, that would have been the 15th. When the sun rose, it would ALSO have been the 15th.
If the idea is being spread that Jesus ate a meal that was not the 15th of Nissan, it was clearly not a Passover seder.
You can't have it both ways, no matter what you wish to believe.
I just addressed this. If it was before the 15th, it wasn't Passover.
If you say so. I don't care about the timing. I don't have a dog in this race.
What I DO want is to clarify when Passover is. If Jesus ate a big meal before Passover, cool. If the meal Jesus had was a Passover seder, good for him. It's no skin off my nose, either way.
But don't try to remake the Jewish calendar to fix a textual problem you have if the gospels didn't manage to make everything nice and neat.
Which would be patently nonsense, as God commanded that Passover is SEVEN DAYS, from the night that is the 15th of Nissan until the 21st.
Which, again, is nonsense, as the commandment to refrain from eating Chametz (leavened bread) is the whole week long. However, the actual days that were celebrated as a particular holiday are the first night and subsequent day, and the seventh night and subsequent day.

Because the three options you have listed are patented nonsense.
If Jesus changed things, it was clear that he wasn't keeping Passover properly.
Passover is only as I've described it. If you have come up with anything else... It could be Charlie, it could be Shirley, but it WON'T be Passover.
This just shows simple ignorance. Sometimes Passover is referred to as Pesach, and sometimes it is referred to as the Holiday of Matza.
Believing that Passover is some other bizarre thing because you are caught up in bad translations... would explain a lot, but it doesn't mean that you have a clue about what Passover IS, or when it is.

1) Is the following translation of Lev 23:5-6 correct?

"The LORD'S Passover begins at twilight on the fourteenth day of the month.
On the fifteenth day of that month the LORD'S Feast of Unleavened Bread begins; for seven days you must eat bread made without yeast."
Is this not a total of eight days for Passover and Unleavened Bread?

2) Are you comfortable that Jewish observance of these two feasts has experienced no variation since the NT account of them 2,000 years ago?

3) I would appreciate your evaluation of post #266.

 

[Harmonious]

Your need for looong posts shows the human element that still figures greatly in jewish belief.

Really? I answered you point by point, and all you've got is to tell me that my post was too long?

:slap: All you've done is shown me that you aren't worth responding to, as you care nothing for what I say, and only wish to complain about the length of my explanation.

Christ has released us from the useless baggage added in the OT that could never bring us salvation.What is necessary now is a simplified form of obedience to keep the Word of God without the works of the law. Pity you can't see that yet. If you believed Jesus and read Mat.23 it might open your eyes.

If you refer to Torah as "useless baggage," I could say that you are hopelessly lazy. You aren't commanded to keep the commandments, as a non-Jew, but your attitude shows that even if you were, you would be more happy to have the commitment removed.

You can't even be bothered to respond properly to a post that addressed your own point for point, respectfully and completely. Why should I believe you care a whit to do God's will, when all you can do is complain about how much work it is?

"Christ has released us from the useless baggage..." As I have been released from the useless baggage of responding to you. Welcome to my Ignore List.

 

[Harmonious]

1) Is this translation of Lev 23:5-6 correct?

"The LORD'S Passover begins at twilight on the fourteenth day of the month.
On the fifteenth day of that month the LORD'S Feast of Unleavened Bread begins; for seven days you must eat bread made without yeast."

No.

A more accurate reflection would be:

In the first month, on the afternoon of the 14th day is [the time that you must sacrifice] God's Passover offering. And on the 15th of that month, it is God's festival of Matzot, when you eat Matzot for seven days.

Is this not a total of eight days for Passover and Unleavened Bread?

No. There is only an eighth day outside of Israel, but not for any of the reasons you've brought.

2) Are you comfortable that Jewish observance of these two feasts has experienced no variation since the NT account of them 2,000 years ago?

Yup. It's called consistency. God has been ever constant with the Jews, and we have (with varying degrees of success) been ever constant to Him.

Technology may have advanced, and we have had to make due without the Temple for a while, but we take PRIDE in the fact that we've been doing the same thing for closer to 3000 years.

The NT account is of no importance to me.

3) I would appreciate your evaluation of post #266.

Coming up then.

 

[Harmonious]

The Passover lamb was sacrificed and roasted in the evening of the 14th, and then eaten the night of the 14th.

That is the first problem. The lamb was sacrificed and roasted in the evening of the 14th, and then eaten that night, which would be the 15th.

The following Passover day of the 14th was the Day of Preparation for the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the day Jesus was crucified.

The clear evidence for the above dates is the testimony of all four gospels that
1) Jesus ate the Passover meal before he died, and
2) that he died on the day before the Sabbath, and
3) that he rose on the first day of the week, Sunday.

If that is what your clear evidence says, then the calculations of the gospels are wrong.

There is only way these reported facts add up:
1) he died on the 14th, Passover (day) Friday.
2) he was in the grave on the 15th (Saturday Sabbath of Unleavened Bread--no Wednesday Passover or Sabbath), and
3) he rose on the 16th (first day of the week, Sunday).

No. What you are left with is that the facts DON'T add up.

If Jesus died on the 14th, it was not yet Passover, and the Last Supper was clearly NOT a Passover meal.

If Jesus died on Passover, then it was the 15th.

Shabbat was Friday night to Saturday, and you are stuck without a nice, neat calculation that gives you three days.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings, but that is the only answer I've got for you, based on when Passover is, and when you say that Jesus died.

All four gospels give this account locating Jesus' death after the Passover meal.

Then all four accounts have even MORE problems, because a Jewish court of law would never MEET on the festival day, which would be the 15th of Nissan.

Regardless of this, if Jesus was killed after the Seder, then you don't get the three days you wanted. (It wouldn't be the first time the gospels were inconsistent.)

Passover in the time of Jesus could mean three things:
1) Passover - Nisan 14, one-day feast
2) Unleavened Bread - Nisan 15-21, seven-day feast
3) both feasts together - Nisan 14-21, eight days of feasts

And none of these are used the same in the different gospels.

That's because none of the calculations are correct, Passover is as I described, and you are stuck with the gospels not adding up.

As I said, don't change the Jewish calendar because the authors of the gospel couldn't add and then keep their stories straight.

Then Unleavened Bread in the NT could mean two things:
1) Unleavened Bread - Nisan 15-21, seven-day feast, or
2) both feasts - Nisan 14-21, eight days of feasts

No, I explained what Passover was.

Passover and the Festival of Matza are interchangeable for the same thing. What it means is, as I said before, the authors in the gospels couldn't add and then keep their stories straight. Please don't try to tell me that Passover has changed just so you can get a story that makes sense.

Passover is as it ever was. The only difference is that we have to make due without the Temple.

By the time of the NT, Unleavened Bread was often called Passover, but that is not the name it was given when it was legislated in Lev 23:4-8.

They were ALWAYS interchangeable. See, the difference is that Passover is how God described what God did for the Jews (as He passed over the houses of the Jews during the Plague of the First Born), and the Festival of Matza is how God described what the Jews did for God, trusting that God would provide all provisions, and the Jews left Egypt with nothing but Matza.

It's just two names for the same thing. Jews have always known this. However, the gospel authors were confused about many things. The nomenclature of the holiday and their sense of timing was only one such thing.

It seems the legislated names were correctly used for 800-900 years before there was abbreviation of them into just Passover to refer to any of the three meanings given above, in second response.

No. The legislation is the same as it always was. It was that the authors of the gospels couldn't count, and expected their primary audience not to know the difference.

But by the time of the NT, the abbreviations were virtually interchangeable, and have to be sorted out according to their origins in the OT, where the legislation of them in Leviticus gives the correct nomenclature and understanding of them, and then all four gospels give the actual practice of them in Jesus' lifetime.

No, and I already explained that.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

That is the first problem. The lamb was sacrificed and roasted in the evening of the 14th, and then eaten that night, which would be the 15th.

If that is what your clear evidence says, then the calculations of the gospels are wrong.

No. What you are left with is that the facts DON'T add up.

If Jesus died on the 14th, it was not yet Passover, and the Last Supper was clearly NOT a Passover meal.

If Jesus died on Passover, then it was the 15th.

Shabbat was Friday night to Saturday, and you are stuck without a nice, neat calculation that gives you three days.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings, but that is the only answer I've got for you, based on when Passover is, and when you say that Jesus died.

This is the problem I was having trying to wrap my mind around this 3 day, 3 night or the rising of this god/man on the third day business. It's nice to have those of the Jewish perspective to put things in context regarding the structure of their days and nights.

Then all four accounts have even MORE problems, because a Jewish court of law would never MEET on the festival day, which would be the 15th of Nissan.

Regardless of this, if Jesus was killed after the Seder, then you don't get the three days you wanted. (It wouldn't be the first time the gospels were inconsistent.)

Which is another reason I have a hard time, like some would have us all do, blending all the gospel accounts together. Undoubtedly one will have to keep what fits and throw out the rest.

That's because none of the calculations are correct, Passover is as I described, and you are stuck with the gospels not adding up.

As I said, don't change the Jewish calendar because the authors of the gospel couldn't add and then keep their stories straight.

Agreed. It seems each author expanded on the tale...seemingly to try and fill in some gaps in the "story" that others seemed to leave out or did not explain which appears to have produced more inconsistencies in the process.