What Day was Jesus Crucified?

[smokydot]

Friend ...please take some friendly advice.
Leave the skeptics and unbelievers to it !!!
They have been arguing and denying Jesus even the Messiah from the very start and will not be convinced until the very end.
They can't help it for their unbelief keeps them ' in blindness ' until the fulness of the gentiles is come in Rom.11v25.
THEN God will set about saving them and take away their sins v26,27.

I hear ya'. . .and you are correct.

It's time for you to remind me what your chronology for the death and resurrection of Jesus is.
I've abandoned my former understanding of it.

 

[fallingblood]

Oh, you have a lot riding on the answer to the question you are dodging: "Were there no non-Jews in Israel at the time?". . .which is why you have been dodging it
(as seen in the link below).
Because if there were non-Jews in Isreal, your argument falls that there could have been no followers of Jesus employed in Pilate's household, and therefore,
in a position to report what transpired in the praetorium at Jesus' trial. . .thus disabling your attempt to descredit the NT reports of Jesus' trial.
You previously dodged that question in post #620, and others, while dodging is the very prevarication with which you charge me.

I'm not dodging the question. Again, it doesn't matter if there were Gentiles in Israel. It has nothing to do with this. But yes, there were some.

It doesn't do anything to my argument. I explained already why it doesn't matter. Jesus specifically stated that his message was for the Jews. His followers were only suppose to go to the Jews. As far as we know, the Jesus movement, even after his death (for at least some time) remained strictly Jewish. In order to be part of the Jesus movement, one was required to convert to Judaism. So there is no reason at all to assume that some gentiles, in the household of Pilate, were followers of Jesus.

Actually, if there were, that is something that would most likely be mentioned, as it is somewhat important.

Again, no dodge. Simply, it doesn't matter one way or another, which I've explained before, this actually being the third time now.

Nice attempt at transfer of guilt. . .but your problems with Christians are due to nothing more than your unbelief in Jesus Christ.

My problem with Christians are people like you. The arrogance and ignorance that you've shown is just mind blowing.

I know quite a few Christians I have no problem with. A_E is one of them. I respect his opinion and enjoy reading what he has to say. My family is Christian. My wife is Christian. My mom, dad, father in law, mother in law, brothers, sister and brother in laws, grandparents, etc, are Christians. The only members of my family who aren't are me and my older brother. I have no problem with any of them. It simply with people like you.

And the above posts shows a huge reason as to why. Instead of making a logical argument, you make some condescending remark, and illogical remark as to why you can simply dismiss what I say, instead of dealing with it. If you actually took some time to read, and understand; then, and only then, respond in a mature manner, I would have no problem with you. But instead, you've never shown any reason to take you seriously.

Having not prevailed in the arguments, you seek to prevail in the arguments about the arguments.

What's next. . .arguments about the arguments about the arguments?

What are you even talking about? I've offered complete rebuttals to pretty much everything you've said. You've never offered anything of substance back. Instead, you make ridiculous remarks that are illogical, and only show that you can't actually debate anything, but instead, must ignore and dismiss.

Maybe if you took some time to actually debate, or even discuss in a logical fashion, we wouldn't be having this problem. But go ahead, make another condescending remark, and dismiss the information that has been given. Because we all know now, that is all that you can do.

 

[fallingblood]

So your purpose wasn't its meaning. . .you had another agenda, which evidently I thwarted in thinking you were asking for, and so I gave, its meaning. . .
and you're still hot under the collar about that agenda being thwarted. . .so much so that you have to accuse me of lying, plagairization, dishonesty, etc., etc.

This is what you have to resort to? You are called out on your lies, shown where you've just been dishonest, and then you make some ridiculous statement as to what? Others are persecuting you? That others have personal agendas against you to discredit you? Please.

He's explained his meaning. If you simply can't comprehend the posts, you just shouldn't participate.

 

[fallingblood]

Friend ...please take some friendly advice.
Leave the skeptics and unbelievers to it !!!
They have been arguing and denying Jesus even the Messiah from the very start and will not be convinced until the very end.
They can't help it for their unbelief keeps them ' in blindness ' until the fulness of the gentiles is come in Rom.11v25.
THEN God will set about saving them and take away their sins v26,27.

Do you understand that is quite offensive? Honestly, if you and smoky are representation of what the saved look like, I don't want it.

 

[smokydot]

I'm still lauging about that. Here we were pointing out moving goal posts, lying, and plagiarism...
... and smoky demands examples of prevarication. :biglaugh:
prevarication:
A lie (also called prevarication, falsehood) is a type of deception in the form of an untruthful statement, especially with the intention to deceive others, often with the further intention to maintain a secret or reputation, protect someone's feelings or to avoid a punishment or repercussion ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevarication

Show examples of prevarication as defined in red, which, in answer to your repeated question, is my understanding of its meaning.

You haven't. . .and you can't. . .because there are none. . .

However, what there are is presented here:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2277247-post679.html

 

[Beta]

Do you understand that is quite offensive? Honestly, if you and smoky are representation of what the saved look like, I don't want it.

I'm sorry if you feel offended ! I did not address YOU with this 'apparently offensive' scripture knowing you are not a believer in Christ or the NT and would not understand what was being said.
Perhaps you would feel more at home discussing OT only ?

 

[Harmonious]

Well, at this point it seems that what I know from the NT record is that he rose on the first day of the week after a Sabbath. (Matthew 28:1-15)

What is meant by "the next day after Preparation Day"?

I would guess that means the first day of Passover.

 

[smokydot]

I would guess that means the first day of Passover.

Would you say that is Nisan 14 or 15?

 

[waitasec]

Friend ...please take some friendly advice.
Leave the skeptics and unbelievers to it !!!
They have been arguing and denying Jesus even the Messiah from the very start and will not be convinced until the very end.

define denying?

They can't help it for their unbelief keeps them ' in blindness ' until the fulness of the gentiles is come in Rom.11v25.
THEN God will set about saving them and take away their sins v26,27.

we can say the exact same thing about you


otherwise i think smokey should take your advice....

 

[smokydot]

I'm not dodging the question. Again, it doesn't matter if there were Gentiles in Israel. It has nothing to do with this. But yes, there were some.
It doesn't do anything to my argument. I explained already why it doesn't matter. Jesus specifically stated that his message was for the Jews. His followers were only suppose to go to the Jews. As far as we know, the Jesus movement, even after his death (for at least some time) remained strictly Jewish. In order to be part of the Jesus movement, one was required to convert to Judaism. So there is no reason at all to assume that some gentiles, in the household of Pilate, were followers of Jesus.
Actually, if there were, that is something that would most likely be mentioned, as it is somewhat important.

Again, no dodge. Simply, it doesn't matter one way or another, which I've explained before, this actually being the third time now.

My problem with Christians are people like you. The arrogance and ignorance that you've shown is just mind blowing.

I know quite a few Christians I have no problem with. A_E is one of them. I respect his opinion and enjoy reading what he has to say. My family is Christian. My wife is Christian. My mom, dad, father in law, mother in law, brothers, sister and brother in laws, grandparents, etc, are Christians. The only members of my family who aren't are me and my older brother. I have no problem with any of them. It simply with people like you.

And the above posts shows a huge reason as to why. Instead of making a logical argument, you make some condescending remark, and illogical remark as to why you can simply dismiss what I say, instead of dealing with it. If you actually took some time to read, and understand; then, and only then, respond in a mature manner, I would have no problem with you. But instead, you've never shown any reason to take you seriously.

What are you even talking about? I've offered complete rebuttals to pretty much everything you've said. You've never offered anything of substance back. Instead, you make ridiculous remarks that are illogical, and only show that you can't actually debate anything, but instead, must ignore and dismiss.

Maybe if you took some time to actually debate, or even discuss in a logical fashion, we wouldn't be having this problem. But go ahead, make another condescending remark, and dismiss the information that has been given. Because we all know now, that is all that you can do.

More arguments about the arguments.

What's next. . .arguments about the arguments about the arguments?

Not if it's stopped. . .you're in drama mode again.

 

[smokydot]

This is what you have to resort to? You are called out on your lies, shown where you've just been dishonest, and then you make some ridiculous statement as to what? Others are persecuting you? That others have personal agendas against you to discredit you? Please.
He's explained his meaning. If you simply can't comprehend the posts, you just shouldn't participate.

The argument is over.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

And those very Greek scholars translated parthenos as virgin in Mt 1:23, 25:1,7,10.

You might want to reconsider your accusation about me and Greek scholars.
As can those those Greek scholars who provided them in the first place.

Looking at the NIV is not the same thing as consulting Greek scholars.

Besides, I didn't tell you who my friends were, so you don't know what translations they submitted to the committee.

 

[smokydot]

Do you understand that is quite offensive? Honestly, if you and smoky are representation of what the saved look like, I don't want it.

And that's not offensive?

Or these:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2270889-post200.html
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2271007-post205.html
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2273406-post387.html
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2273857-post430.html


You're in drama mode again.

 

[fallingblood]

I'm sorry if you feel offended ! I did not address YOU with this 'apparently offensive' scripture knowing you are not a believer in Christ or the NT and would not understand what was being said.
Perhaps you would feel more at home discussing OT only ?

It's offensive because you make the assumption that people like me, who do not believe what you're saying, need saving.

I think it would probably be more offensive to someone like A_E, who is also disagreeing with you and Smoky, but is a Christian.

 

[fallingblood]

No more offensive than this:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2277489-post691.html

So it's no more offensive than something you said? Great.

 

[fallingblood]

The argument is over.

I'm glad you're finally admitting you can't continue. Getting so tangled in your lies must have finally had it's toll.

 

[fallingblood]

More arguments about the arguments.

What's next. . .arguments about the arguments about the arguments?

Not if it's stopped.

Why not admit the truth and just say that you don't have any rebuttals? It's as simple as that. There is no need to dodge, and be dishonest.

 

[Beta]

It's offensive because you make the assumption that people like me, who do not believe what you're saying, need saving.

I think it would probably be more offensive to someone like A_E, who is also disagreeing with you and Smoky, but is a Christian.

Not interested in starting a new argument but anyone who is a Christian would read and believe the NT and the scripture I quoted.
God loves everyone and will do his utmost to save ungrateful humans - as long as they are willing in the end.

 

[fallingblood]

Not interested in starting a new argument but anyone who is a Christian would read and believe the NT and the scripture I quoted.
God loves everyone and will do his utmost to save ungrateful humans - as long as they are willing in the end.

But even though I believe in God, I still need saving? The only way I will be saved if I believe your way? I don't see God being the close minded.

 

[Beta]

But even though I believe in God, I still need saving? The only way I will be saved if I believe your way? I don't see God being the close minded.

BELIEVING in God is not all that is required but DOING what he says !!! :yes: