• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What Day was Jesus Crucified?

smokydot

Well-Known Member
You have to understand what the Kingdom of God is first. It is a Jewish concept. Thus, you need to know a little about Judaism in order to understand the Kingdom of God.
It is adequately explained by Jesus in the NT.
His explanation of it is not the same as common Jewish belief at the time.
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
Not at all. Jesus was a Jew. Dying on the cross did absolutely nothing but show to the vast majority of Jews that he was not the Messiah. It fulfilled no laws. Especially, from my understanding, you can't fulfill the laws. I mean, I can't die on the cross and then assume others can murder people because I fulfilled a law.
Now that's one amateurish understanding. . .
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the time to actually read what I said. Because you obviously haven't. Honestly, I don't care what the Gospels say in this case, because they are wrong. It is as simple as that. And honestly, there is no point to show why I hold this opinion, as you clearly will only make some condescending remark, after you didn't even read the entire post.
And I declare with the same authority as you, that it is you, not the gospels, who is wrong.
Underlining above by me.
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
Hebrew for me is infinately more complex than Greek. I have friends that are masters of both, but I have to sit and think about every word for a while. I parse it according to a complex formula that breaks each word down to its three letter root and then reconstruct it to determine its place in syntax and grammar. I use two lexicons and two or more grammars, depending on my confidence in my translation.

Then, I look at the text as it appears in the LXX, which is the bridge from the Masoretic text to the NT. If I'm doing a paper on the particular verse, I'll also look at variant LXX and NT manuscripts. Then I'll look at the Nesle-Aland 27 and see what's what.
Do you think you are guilty of Poisonshady' charge in post #233?
 

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
Doesn't John 18:28 settle the matter?

The beginning of chapter 18 shows they came and arrested Yeshua during the Passover Preparation. It was the 14th. This was most likely (Thursday evening - Friday morning) while it was still dark outside because it says they came with torches and lanterns. So this is still dark and still considered the 14th.

I surmise it was before the Sabbath because in Chapter 19 is where they supposedly took him to be crucified. John 19:14 says it was Preparation before the Passover and about the 6th hour......This, to me, sounds as though this is about (6am), but could also be about the 6th hour of his captivity (not sure). Regardless, we know it is the Preparation before the Passover, as it states, and Yeshua is then crucified and Joseph of Arimathaea is allowed to retrieve the body...which was done before the start of the Sabbath (Friday evening).

John 19:31 says;
The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day,.........

Preparation of the Passover on the 14th and Sabbath on the 15th.

I've already come to the conclusion the 3 day, 3 night in the tomb doesn't add up and seem to work out more like two of our (Western) days and nights.

Friday (night)
Saturday (day)
Saturday (night)
Sunday (day)

By (western) standards this is 2 days 2 nights. By Jewish standards he doesn't even seem to have been in the tomb that long (not 2 days, 2 nights)

Considering John 20:1-2 says

The first [day] of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.


:confused:
 
Last edited:

Beta

Well-Known Member
You have to understand what the Kingdom of God is first. It is a Jewish concept. Thus, you need to know a little about Judaism in order to understand the Kingdom of God.
Perhaps you would like to give a short explanation of it , I'd appreciate it.:)
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the time to actually read what I said. Because you obviously haven't. Honestly, I don't care what the Gospels say in this case, because they are wrong. It is as simple as that. And honestly, there is no point to show why I hold this opinion, as you clearly will only make some condescending remark, after you didn't even read the entire post.
Oh, you said plainly in post #354 that the Jews had nothing to do with the killing of Jesus.

In post #386, I posted many NT reports which stated to the contrary.
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
And the NT is simply wrong about that. Jesus can not be the Jewish Messiah. Maybe he could be the Christian Messiah, but that is something completely different.
And I declare with the same authority as you that you are simply wrong about that.

The Scriptures know of no other Messiah than the one promised to Israel.

Jesus was a Jew from Israel, and it is the overwhelming testimony of the NT that he is the Jewish meshi`ahh (annointed prince leader who was to come),
translated into the Greek word, Christos, and into the English word, Christ.

The Scriptures know of only one meshi`ahh, or Christos, or Christ.
The Jewish apostles say it is Jesus of Nazareth.
 
Last edited:

smokydot

Well-Known Member
That had to do with what?
Jesus' rising from the dead knocks the props from under the Jewish assertion that his dying on a cross proves he was not the Messiah.
That is just ridiculous. Because there is no suggestion that the first followers of Jesus ever stopped celebrating Passover. The Passover has nothing to do with Jesus. The fact that you would even suggest that it does shows your ignorance on the subject.
Nope.
Nope, that would be contradictions. Check out Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus or Interrupting Jesus for a quick overview.

Isaiah 7:14, where the NRSV uses the better translation of young woman instead of a faulty translation of virgin. John 3:16 also has a distinct difference. Just two off the top of my head.
The Jewish word in Isa 7:14 is almah.
The Greek Septuagint, translated from the Hebrew c. 200 B.C., translated the Hebrew word almah into the Greek word, parthenos,
which translates into the English word virgin.
That was 200 years before the birth of Jesus.
Matthew (in 1:23), 200 years later, simply quoted Isa 7:14 from the Septuagint of his time, where the Greek word there in that 200-year-old translation was parthenos, which is virgin.

The Greek word parthenos is likewise translated into the English word "virgin" in Mt 25:1,7,11; Lk 1:27; Ac 21:9; 1 Co 7:25,28,34,36,37; 2 Co 11:2,
and even used of men in Rev 14:4.

Actually, it is the NIV which has the better translation, as in seen for example in Mt 25:1,7,11, which is the parable of the ten parthenois (virgins),
in addition to its use in other Scriptures.

And is the "distinct difference" of Jn 3:16 a material difference?
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure we'll ever get to the bottom of this. I never never said Passover was a Sabbath- you do and some Jews do.
The 2 Sabbaths in question are :
1) the first day of unleavened bread (also called High Day,Sabbath or feast Day or even Passover by some)
2)the weekly Sabbath
Jesus did have a jewish burial wrapped in spices Lk.23v50-53 and that was on the day of preparation v54. The following day starting immediately after the burial at sunset was the Sabbath or ANNUAL High Day (not the weekly Sabbath).The women stood afar off watching the procedings v49.Since it was already the Sabbath they could do nothing but wait in order to buy and prepare spices and ointments when the Sabbath was over.We should remember their task was not accomplished as quick as it might be today and could well have taken them all day friday.They may not have had a supermarket nearby with fast transport or had Mixers, Grinders and electricity to conveniently switch on :areyoucra.They were women who also needed to eat and rest during their labours that could not be rushed. And again they were having to wait until the weekly Sabbath was past v56. (perhaps you might look into the process of making ointments and balsam to see how long it takes)
You did not address my next to last response in this post, regarding your time line meaning a three-day delay in the proper preparation of Jesus body for burial.
 
Last edited:

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Didn't Harmonious just say the term Passover was interchangeable with Unleavened Bread? The Passover referred to here is Unleavened Bread.
It's amazing how you can take that part of what Harmonious said, and misconstrue it to try to fit your idea. Maybe you want to try to read all of what Harmonious said.
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
because you base your faith on 'proof'
:rolleyes:
it's one thing to agree to disagree but to keep at it as you are it's pretty apparent you need evidence to sustain your faith.
Is that the only thing for which it can be evidence?

Think outside the box now.
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Perhaps you would like to give a short explanation of it , I'd appreciate it.:)
The Kingdom of God was a physical Kingdom that would replace the Earthly Kingdom, which at that time was Rome. It did not refer to a kingdom in heaven, but one on this Earth.

When this Kingdom came, the righteous would be resurrected in a general resurrection, and live in this Kingdom. From what I recall, it was also a time in which people would be judged.

It isn't as simple as that, but that is pretty much the basics. I know some believed that the Messiah was suppose to rule in this Kingdom, and usher it in.

It did not refer to heaven, and contrary to what Smoky said, the Kingdom of God that Jesus was speaking about was the same idea that was prevalent in Judaism during that time.
 

waitasec

Veteran Member
Is that the only thing for which it can be evidence?

Think outside the box now.

i never claimed to believe the bible as the word of god....you did
through faith,


i'm just saying this talk of faith is a load of horse puckey
thank you for proving my point
:rolleyes:
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
And I declare with the same authority as you that you are simply wrong about that.

The Scriptures know of no other Messiah than the one promised to Israel.

Jesus was a Jew from Israel, and it is the overwhelming testimony of the NT that he is the Jewish meshi`ahh (annointed prince leader who was to come),
translated into the Greek word, Christos, and into the English word, Christ.

The Scriptures know of only one meshi`ahh, or Christos, or Christ.
The Jewish apostles say it is Jesus of Nazareth.
Other Jewish leaders also claimed to be Messiah, or had disciples who called them that as well. The fact is, none of them have fulfilled Messianic prophecy, and none have the right to be referred to as the Jewish Messiah. A basic understanding of Judaism would greatly help you here.
 
Top