On what day was Christ crucified?

G

garyflet

Member
Hi Y'all,

The Gospel of Mark (and the other Synoptic Gospels) has Jesus being crucified after Passover, yet John has Jesus crucified before. For anyone not familiar with this biblical curiosity, I'll run through the passages. It helps to remember that for the Jews, a new day begins when it gets dark. So the day of Passover starts in the evening with eating the Passover meal and continues the next day until evening. The lambs would be prepared for the Passover meal on the day prior to Passover (this day is called the day of Preparation for the Passover), when it became evening, Passover day would begin and the meal eaten. According to Mark 14:12, the disciples ask Jesus where to prepare the Passover meal, that would be the day of Preparation. Then that evening they have the Passover meal, also known as the Last Supper (Mark 14:17-25). After that, He is betrayed by Judas and put on trial, spends the night in jail and early in the morning the Sanhedrin sends him over to Pilate. (15:1). Pilate condemns him to death and he is nailed to the cross at 9:00 am (15:25), the morning after the Passover meal was eaten.

But in the Gospel of John, Jesus was crucified on the day of Preparation at about noon (John 19:14-16). For John, Jesus is dead by the time of the Passover meal. Note that in John, the description of the trial before Pilate is very elaborate compared to Mark. (John 18:28-19:16). In John, the Jewish leaders refuse to enter into Pilate's residence for the trial because they do not want to be defiled before the Passover meal. In Mark, they had already eaten the Passover meal the night before. Of course in John, Jesus never instructs his disciples on Passover preparations.

Do these differences matter? Do we care about the inconsistency? The Gospel of John is considered to have been written decades (90-95 AD) after the Gospel of Mark (65-70). Maybe the story got changed along the way. But why would it get changed? Would there be a reason for it? One answer is that John is the only gospel writer to advance the motif, Jesus as the Lamb of God. So the story got changed from Christ being crucified after the Passover, to Him dying at the same time as the Passover lamb. Sounds good?
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
garyflet said:
Hi Y'all,

The Gospel of Mark (and the other Synoptic Gospels) has Jesus being crucified after Passover, yet John has Jesus crucified before. For anyone not familiar with this biblical curiosity, I'll run through the passages. It helps to remember that for the Jews, a new day begins when it gets dark. So the day of Passover starts in the evening with eating the Passover meal and continues the next day until evening. The lambs would be prepared for the Passover meal on the day prior to Passover (this day is called the day of Preparation for the Passover), when it became evening, Passover day would begin and the meal eaten. According to Mark 14:12, the disciples ask Jesus where to prepare the Passover meal, that would be the day of Preparation. Then that evening they have the Passover meal, also known as the Last Supper (Mark 14:17-25). After that, He is betrayed by Judas and put on trial, spends the night in jail and early in the morning the Sanhedrin sends him over to Pilate. (15:1). Pilate condemns him to death and he is nailed to the cross at 9:00 am (15:25), the morning after the Passover meal was eaten.

But in the Gospel of John, Jesus was crucified on the day of Preparation at about noon (John 19:14-16). For John, Jesus is dead by the time of the Passover meal. Note that in John, the description of the trial before Pilate is very elaborate compared to Mark. (John 18:28-19:16). In John, the Jewish leaders refuse to enter into Pilate's residence for the trial because they do not want to be defiled before the Passover meal. In Mark, they had already eaten the Passover meal the night before. Of course in John, Jesus never instructs his disciples on Passover preparations.

Do these differences matter? Do we care about the inconsistency? The Gospel of John is considered to have been written decades (90-95 AD) after the Gospel of Mark (65-70). Maybe the story got changed along the way. But why would it get changed? Would there be a reason for it? One answer is that John is the only gospel writer to advance the motif, Jesus as the Lamb of God. So the story got changed from Christ being crucified after the Passover, to Him dying at the same time as the Passover lamb. Sounds good?
Click to expand...
The passover meal discrepancy has intrigued me at times. My thought is that because they were obliged to sight the new moon to herald the beginning of each month, the authorities in Jerusalem or all Judea might have seen it after sundown, while Jesus, who was east of the Jordan at the beginning of the month, would have seen it during a previous day (before sundown).

Mark 10:1 KJV — And he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan: and the people resort unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again.
Mark 10:32 KJV — And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him,
Mark 10:33 KJV — Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles:

But it's interesting that none of the gospels suggest that Jesus ate the passover lamb in His last meal. He didn't say "This lamb is my body..." Maybe that's because the lamb had to be killed by the priests, and they were on Jerusalem time.

From GotQuestions.org:
The beginning of the month was known not by astronomical calculations but by the testimony of messengers appointed to watch for the first visible appearance of the new moon. As soon as the first sliver was seen, the fact was announced throughout the whole country by signal fires on the mountaintops and the blowing of trumpets. The Hebrew word for “month” (hodesh) literally means “new moon.”
www.gotquestions.org

What was the significance of the new moon in Bible times? | GotQuestions.org

What was the significance of the new moon in Bible times? How was the new moon related to the Hebrew feasts and calendar?
www.gotquestions.org

The folks in the other side of Jordan might have had a different system. If true, it might be a way to determine the actual year of the crucifixion.
 
Last edited:
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
Derf said:
My thought is that because they were obliged to sight the new moon to herald the beginning of each month, the authorities in Jerusalem or all Judea might have seen it after sundown, while Jesus, who was east of the Jordan at the beginning of the month, would have seen it during a previous day (before sundown).
Click to expand...
I think I got that backwards. If those east of Jordan saw the crescent of the new moon at the same time as someone west of Jordan, it might still be day (sun not yet set) west of Jordan while it was even (sun already set) east of Jordan. That would put them on a later schedule, with the month starting a day later, so it wouldn't work like I thought.

There might be enough difference in perception of the new moon, however, between the locations to account for the difference. Maybe it was cloudy and they couldn't see the moon in one area until the next day.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
This article is interesting. It explains that Jewish tradition has developed that put the passover on the day after the full moon, but the instruction from Moses was based on the counting of days from the new moon. That could result in an error of one day, which Jesus would likely follow the Mosaic timing, though He wouldn't be able to have the Pascal lamb, since it required the priests to kill at the supposedly right time.
www.ministrymagazine.org

Ancient Jewish Calendar Construction—No. 1

A look at historical, archaeological, and scientific findings.
www.ministrymagazine.org
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
I think my idea can still work. Imagine someone sitting on the east side of Jordan, and someone sitting in Jerusalem. A waxing crescent sets after the sun. If the sun has already set in the west, but it isn't dark yet, then according to @JudgeRightly's broadcast link, the day isn't over until darkness falls, maybe 90 minutes after sunset, which will be later in Jerusalem than east of Jordan. But the sliver of the moon will happen at approximately the same time for both. So if the new moon sliver becomes visible after dark east of Jordan, but before dark in Jerusalem, then they might have different days for the first of the month, which would lead to different days for the day passover is celebrated, with those east of Jordan going first. If Jesus was east of Jordan when the month began, then He and His disciples might have been following their calendar for the passover day.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Derf said:
I think my idea can still work. Imagine someone sitting on the east side of Jordan, and someone sitting in Jerusalem. A waxing crescent sets after the sun. If the sun has already set in the west, but it isn't dark yet, then according to @JudgeRightly's broadcast link, the day isn't over until darkness falls, maybe 90 minutes after sunset, which will be later in Jerusalem than east of Jordan. But the sliver of the moon will happen at approximately the same time for both. So if the new moon sliver becomes visible after dark east of Jordan, but before dark in Jerusalem, then they might have different days for the first of the month, which would lead to different days for the day passover is celebrated, with those east of Jordan going first. If Jesus was east of Jordan when the month began, then He and His disciples might have been following their calendar for the passover day.
Click to expand...
I think that Israel's "times" for their religious observances are based on Jerusalem and not independent points all over the earth.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
I think that Israel's "times" for their religious observances are based on Jerusalem and not independent points all over the earth.
Click to expand...
Perhaps now, but what about when it was more difficult for worldwide communication? Would a Jew in Rome celebrate the new moon on the same date as a Jew in Babylon?
 
G

garyflet

Member
JudgeRightly said:
Recommend listening to this show:

Regarding the Lord's death, which day of the week was that? | KGOV.com

kgov.com kgov.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for the citation. Unfortunately, it does not address the differences between the gospels, including the main difference, whether Christ was crucified at noon on the day of Preparation (with the Passover meal in the evening) as John says, or at 9 AM in the morning after the Passover meal, as Mark says. The main concern of the recording is to prove that Christ was crucified on a Thursday instead of the traditional Good Friday, giving Christ three days in the tomb. The recording does give a timeline starting at about 26:50. This timeline agrees with John, except it says that Jesus was crucified as 9 AM as Mark says.

The timeline of the recording: The last supper takes place on the day before Passover, Jesus is crucified on the day of Preparation at 9AM and dies at the same time as the lamb is sacrificed for the Passover meal in the evening. The problem is that Mark clearly states that the last supper was the Passover meal. From Mark 14:

12On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb is sacrificed, his disciples said to him, “Where do you want us to go and make the preparations for you to eat the Passover?” 13So he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, “Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you; follow him, 14and wherever he enters, say to the owner of the house, ‘The Teacher asks, Where is my guest room where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’ 15He will show you a large room upstairs, furnished and ready. Make preparations for us there.” 16So the disciples set out and went to the city, and found everything as he had told them; and they prepared the Passover meal.

It would seem that if Jesus died before Passover as John says, the narrative in Mark is wrong because they prepare the Passover meal and eat it as the last supper. My explanation in the original post is that John changed narrative to go along with the concept of the Lamb of God implies that John was manipulating the facts. Maybe not the best explanation?
 
R

Rhema

Active member
As I read through this thread, I don't see anyone disagreeing with the belief that Jesus did indeed eat the Passover meal with the disciples. (Is this pretty much in agreement here?)

Over the years, though, I have read through some (albeit bizarre) razzle-dazzle linguistic magic posts that assert the Passover meal in the Synoptics was not the actual Passover. And I've read other wild ideas that there were "real" Jews, such as Jesus, who ate on the "real" Passover day, while those in the Temple got it wrong.

I'm not yet about to post my personal views, yet, but just noting some observations on other posts.

Thanks,
Rhema
(btw, Hi Derf)
 
G

garyflet

Member
Rhema, You would agree, however, that the Gospel of John states that the disciples and Jesus did not eat the Passover meal, no? Do you think there's anything to the idea that John, the only gospel writer to use the "Lamb of God" motif, wanted to emphasize that motif by having Jesus die at the same time as the Passover lamb? Or do you have a more detailed reason in mind?

Thanks,
Gary
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
Rhema said:
As I read through this thread, I don't see anyone disagreeing with the belief that Jesus did indeed eat the Passover meal with the disciples. (Is this pretty much in agreement here?)

Over the years, though, I have read through some (albeit bizarre) razzle-dazzle linguistic magic posts that assert the Passover meal in the Synoptics was not the actual Passover. And I've read other wild ideas that there were "real" Jews, such as Jesus, who ate on the "real" Passover day, while those in the Temple got it wrong.

I'm not yet about to post my personal views, yet, but just noting some observations on other posts.

Thanks,
Rhema
(btw, Hi Derf)
Click to expand...
Hi Rhema. I'm sorry, but I don't remember anyone by this name. Did you previously post under another name?
 
R

Rhema

Active member
garyflet said:
Rhema, You would agree, however, that the Gospel of John states that the disciples and Jesus did not eat the Passover meal, no? Do you think there's anything to the idea that John, the only gospel writer to use the "Lamb of God" motif, wanted to emphasize that motif by having Jesus die at the same time as the Passover lamb? Or do you have a more detailed reason in mind?

Thanks,
Gary
Click to expand...
Sorry, it turned into a very out of control weekend. (Including the fact I cannot find my essay on this topic.)

I am familiar with the above assertion about John, but after going through the Greek text with a fine tooth comb, and making comparison with the Hebrew Grammar and Syntax as found in the instructions of Passover observance, there doesn't seem to be any evidence to support a crucifixion on a different day.

garyflet said:
For John, Jesus is dead by the time of the Passover meal.
Click to expand...
But... the Passover lambs were not killed until after the sunset. Not during the day.

Numbers 9 clearly confirms God’s command to keep the Passover on the 14th day of the first month—not on the 15th. As recorded in Numbers 9, all nine requirements of the Passover ceremony—ALL THE STATUTES and ALL THE ORDINANCES, were to be observed on the 14th. Under the Old Covenant, the Passover ceremony began with the slaying of the lambs. Exodus 12 shows the set time for slaying the Passover lambs:​
​
“Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year; ye shall take it from the sheep, or from the goats; and ye shall keep it unto [until] the fourteenth day of the same month; and the WHOLE ASSEMBLY of the congregation of Israel shall kill it AT DUSK [Hebrew ben ha arbayim]” (Ex. 12:5-6, JPSA).​

So the lamb is killed at sunset, then skinned and dressed, and then roasted, which would mean it is eaten in the middle of the night... BETWEEN the EVENINGS.

in the first month, on the fourteenth of the month, between the evenings, is the passover to Jehovah;​
(Leviticus 23:5 YLT)

While Young writes "between the evenings," Everett Fox uses a more precise rendition of "between the setting-times [Hebrew ben ha arbayim].

Leviticus 23:4-6: “These are the appointed-times of YHWH, proclamations of holiness, which you are to proclaim at their appointed-times: on the first New-Moon [month], on the fourteenth after the New Moon, between the setting-times [Hebrew ben ha arbayim] (is) Passover to YHWH. On the fifteenth day after this New-Moon (is) the pilgrimagefestival of matzot [unleavened bread] to YHWH...” (The Schocken Bible: Volume I; hereafter designated as SB).​

I think some of the confusion about the Gospel of John actually stems from the non-Jewish non-Hebrew speaking assumptions about Passover by Gentile Christians.

Fox’s translation of Exodus 12:6: “It [the Passover lamb] shall be for you in safekeeping, until [up to] the fourteenth day after this New Moon [month], and they are to slay it—the entire assembly of the community of Israel—between the setting-times [Hebrew ben ha arbayim]” (SB).​
​
​
In order to understand the exact time of day on the 14th that the lambs were to be slain, we need to determine the Scriptural meaning of the phrase ben ha arbayim. This Hebrew phrase reveals the specific time of day that the Passover was to begin.​
​
​
What is the meaning of the phrase ben ha arbayim, “between the two evenings” or “between the setting-times”? Does it mean the time between the evening of one day and the evening of the next day? Could the Passover lambs be slain at any time in this 24-hour period? Does it mean between noon, the point when the sun is at its zenith, and sunset, when the sun has completed its descent? Does it mean from the mid-point in the afternoon, approximately 3 PM, until sunset ending the 14th? Does it mean from sunset until dark, at the beginning of the 14th? How can we really know?​

And I add, might it be between the setting time of the sun, and the setting time of the moon?

Should we accept the traditional Jewish interpretation of ben ha arbayim, which arose many centuries after the Passover was instituted, and which proclaims that it is the time from mid-afternoon to sunset?​

I have great doubts, and believe this interpretation came from the growth of the meat packing industry - ye ole' butcher Temple - who wanted more time to prep the lambs before delivery to the hundreds of households at sunset.

In his narration of Israel’s first Passover, Josephus shows that the Scriptural ordinances for observing the Passover—which included the domestic sacrifice of the Passover lambs on the 14th—were still being practiced by the Jews during his lifetime. He writes, “But when the fourteenth day was come, and all were ready to depart, they offered the sacrifice, and purified their houses, using bunches of hyssop for that purpose; and when they had supped, they burnt the remainder of the flesh, as just ready to depart. Whence it is that WE DO STILL OFFER THIS SACRIFICE IN LIKE MANNER TO THIS DAY, and call this festival Pascha...” (Antiquities of the Jews, Bk. II, Ch. 14, Sec. 6, emphasis added).​

ben ha arbayim originally was understood to mean the period of time following sunset. Here is their admission: “ ‘Between the two evenings’ is usually taken to mean between sundown and dark, a period of about an hour or so....This may be correct as far as the original Passover instructions were concerned. “If there was any other legitimate way to interpret the expression [ben ha arbayim] when considerations of the time [required for the temple sacrifice] did not allow slaughter of the Passover lambs in the twilight period, WE HAVE NO RECORD OF IT.” (We can now conclude) that the commanded time for slaying the Passover lambs was ben ha arbayim—”between the two evenings,” or “between the setting-times.” The slaying of the lambs was the first of nine ordinances to be fulfilled on the Passover day.​

I'll point out how this is relevant to the passages in the Gospel of John tomorrow (it's already 3 am here).

Thanks,
Rhema

EDIT: My apologies, it would seem I had forgotten to cite the attribution for the above indented paragraphs.

Chapter Three - Ben Ha Arbayim—“Between the Two Evenings”— The Vital Key to Understanding

The Christian Passover by Fred R. Coulter
www.cbcg.org www.cbcg.org
 
Last edited:
R

Rebel for truth

Member
garyflet said:
Hi Y'all,

The Gospel of Mark (and the other Synoptic Gospels) has Jesus being crucified after Passover, yet John has Jesus crucified before. For anyone not familiar with this biblical curiosity, I'll run through the passages. It helps to remember that for the Jews, a new day begins when it gets dark. So the day of Passover starts in the evening with eating the Passover meal and continues the next day until evening. The lambs would be prepared for the Passover meal on the day prior to Passover (this day is called the day of Preparation for the Passover), when it became evening, Passover day would begin and the meal eaten. According to Mark 14:12, the disciples ask Jesus where to prepare the Passover meal, that would be the day of Preparation. Then that evening they have the Passover meal, also known as the Last Supper (Mark 14:17-25). After that, He is betrayed by Judas and put on trial, spends the night in jail and early in the morning the Sanhedrin sends him over to Pilate. (15:1). Pilate condemns him to death and he is nailed to the cross at 9:00 am (15:25), the morning after the Passover meal was eaten.

But in the Gospel of John, Jesus was crucified on the day of Preparation at about noon (John 19:14-16). For John, Jesus is dead by the time of the Passover meal. Note that in John, the description of the trial before Pilate is very elaborate compared to Mark. (John 18:28-19:16). In John, the Jewish leaders refuse to enter into Pilate's residence for the trial because they do not want to be defiled before the Passover meal. In Mark, they had already eaten the Passover meal the night before. Of course in John, Jesus never instructs his disciples on Passover preparations.

Do these differences matter? Do we care about the inconsistency? The Gospel of John is considered to have been written decades (90-95 AD) after the Gospel of Mark (65-70). Maybe the story got changed along the way. But why would it get changed? Would there be a reason for it? One answer is that John is the only gospel writer to advance the motif, Jesus as the Lamb of God. So the story got changed from Christ being crucified after the Passover, to Him dying at the same time as the Passover lamb. Sounds good?
Click to expand...

I personally feel Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday and rose on the 7th Day Sabbath - (Remember the Sabbath and keep it Holy .... The seventh day is the 7th of the Lord your God Exodus 20:10).
Even as a child I could never understand how he was crucified on a Friday, spent 3 nights in the tomb, rose on the third day and that third day would be Sunday. In my adulthood I studied and found I wasn't the only one. I agree with the teachings below.
www.ucg.org

Jesus Wasn't Crucified on Friday or Resurrected on Sunday: How long was Jesus in the tomb?

How can we fit three days and three nights between a Friday afternoon crucifixion and an Easter Sunday sunrise? The fact is, we can't. So what is the truth about when Jesus was crucified and resurrected? How long was Jesus Christ in the tomb?
www.ucg.org www.ucg.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top