On what day was Christ crucified?

[JudgeRightly]

I personally feel Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday and rose on the 7th Day Sabbath

It's a good thing we don't have to rely on personal feelings for truth then.

I recommend you listen to the show I posted in post #2.

In summary, Jesus was crucified on THURSDAY, because THAT SPECIFIC FRIDAY was a special kind of sabbath day as part of a second calendar the Hebrews used for feasts, and then there was Saturday, a normal sabbath, and then Jesus rose ON the third day, like Scripture says, which was a Sunday, the first day of the week, or rather, on the 8th day of the previous week. 8 is symbolic of new beginnings in Scripture, a "starting over of cycles."

Being crucified on Thursday and rising on Sunday fits with the Biblical narrative, and isn't a matter of opinion or personal feelings.

 

[Rhema]

I agree with the teachings below.

The crux of this assertion is....

Several computer software programs exist that enable us to calculate when the Passover and God's other festivals fall in any given year. Those programs show that in A.D. 31, the year of these events,

And upon what basis is A.D. 31 selected as "the year of these events"?

It's an arbitrary and spurious assertion. (But I'll wait for any evidence if @Rebel for truth deigns to reply.)

Thanks,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

@garyflet

And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!​

(John 19:14 KJV)

As far as I can tell, the proper noun "Passover" was commonly used at that time to refer to three different things... The "day" upon which the Passover Meal was eaten, The Feast of the Unleavened Bread that started on the day after the Passover meal was eaten, and, if it wasn't confusing enough, could mean both - a time period that would include the Unleavened and the Meal - a simple shorthand that did not differentiate.

It would not be inappropriate to understand this verse, then, as a reference to "preparation of the Unleavened." One would have eaten the Meal after sunset, and then have the entire next period of daylight to finish preparations for the next days of Unleavened.

(But please realize I am not Jewish, nor a scholar of Jewish festivals.)

Now John 18 clearly stipulates that Jesus was arrested at night. Taken first to Annas, and then Caiaphas.

Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him,​

(John 18:12 KJV)

These were not Roman soldiers, but in essence a "Temple Guard" of Jews under the command of the High Priest.

The next verse that would seem problematic is this:

Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.​

(John 18:28 KJV)

But who are the "they"? Obviously these "they" had not yet eaten the Passover. But note that neither Annas or Caiaphas were specifically identified as among the "they." (John 19:6 only says chief priests and officers, again of the Temple Guard.)

I would contend that these "they" in 18:28 were the guard sent by Annas and Caiaphas to arrest Jesus, and "it was early," meaning that sunrise had not yet come. We don't really know of a specific roster or schedule for the Temple Guard, but no man can go without rest or food. Were there two rotations? Or three?

I doubt that the Temple Guard would just take time off, where no one would be on duty at all, so it's not irrational to consider that these "they" who "might eat the Passover" were the guards on duty who had been sent to arrest Jesus when the rest of the Jews were eating, and that these "they" had not yet eaten. (There still was time.)

Now please understand. I am not making apology for the Gospel According to John. But I am offering a consideration whereby those scholars who are totally convinced that the Gospel of John has Jesus crucified, dead, and buried before the Passover meal was to be eaten might not have taken everything into account. ( It isn't the "slam dunk" it's made out to be.)

Rhema
(John has other problems, but I don't think this is one of them.)

 

[Derf]

@garyflet

And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!​

(John 19:14 KJV)

As far as I can tell, the proper noun "Passover" was commonly used at that time to refer to three different things... The "day" upon which the Passover Meal was eaten, The Feast of the Unleavened Bread that started on the day after the Passover meal was eaten, and, if it wasn't confusing enough, could mean both - a time period that would include the Unleavened and the Meal - a simple shorthand that did not differentiate.

It would not be inappropriate to understand this verse, then, as a reference to "preparation of the Unleavened." One would have eaten the Meal after sunset, and then have the entire next period of daylight to finish preparations for the next days of Unleavened.

(But please realize I am not Jewish, nor a scholar of Jewish festivals.)

Now John 18 clearly stipulates that Jesus was arrested at night. Taken first to Annas, and then Caiaphas.

Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him,​

(John 18:12 KJV)

These were not Roman soldiers, but in essence a "Temple Guard" of Jews under the command of the High Priest.

The next verse that would seem problematic is this:

Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.​

(John 18:28 KJV)

But who are the "they"? Obviously these "they" had not yet eaten the Passover. But note that neither Annas or Caiaphas were specifically identified as among the "they." (John 19:6 only says chief priests and officers, again of the Temple Guard.)

I would contend that these "they" in 18:28 were the guard sent by Annas and Caiaphas to arrest Jesus, and "it was early," meaning that sunrise had not yet come. We don't really know of a specific roster or schedule for the Temple Guard, but no man can go without rest or food. Were there two rotations? Or three?

I doubt that the Temple Guard would just take time off, where no one would be on duty at all, so it's not irrational to consider that these "they" who "might eat the Passover" were the guards on duty who had been sent to arrest Jesus when the rest of the Jews were eating, and that these "they" had not yet eaten. (There still was time.)

Now please understand. I am not making apology for the Gospel According to John. But I am offering a consideration whereby those scholars who are totally convinced that the Gospel of John has Jesus crucified, dead, and buried before the Passover meal was to be eaten might not have taken everything into account. ( It isn't the "slam dunk" it's made out to be.)

Rhema
(John has other problems, but I don't think this is one of them.)

I don't usually like to post just a link, but this is a decent article about what the evening phrases meant.

The Mystery of Ben Ha Arbayim -- When Was the Passover Killed?

 

[Rhema]

I don't usually like to post just a link, but this is a decent article about what the evening phrases meant.

The Mystery of Ben Ha Arbayim -- When Was the Passover Killed?

Among other things (besides trashing Coulter), your article states the following:

Certainly the Messiah, the Passover Lamb, had to be slain at the proper time!​

​

Yeshua the Messiah was killed at 3:00 PM in the afternoon of Nisan 14, according to Scripture. At the ninth hour, when the Jews began killing their Passover lambs, Yeshua himself hung on the tree.​

This would mean that Jesus did not eat the Passover. I find that assertion to be ... (ahem) ... untenable, given the testimony of the Synoptics. It is a major concern as to whether Jesus ate the Passover or not, and this issue wasn't even addressed in your article. But those who wish to push the Passover-Lamb-human-blood-sacrifice-payment doctrine would tend to avoid this.

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

I found the above article by Coulter to be interesting in that it proposes the following:

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?​

While I have NOT had any time to do "doctoral thesis" research on this, I just wonder if in this particular instance the phrase "between the setting-times" would mean the time between the setting of the sun and the setting of the moon.

Rhema

 

[Derf]

Among other things (besides trashing Coulter), your article states the following:

Certainly the Messiah, the Passover Lamb, had to be slain at the proper time!​

​

Yeshua the Messiah was killed at 3:00 PM in the afternoon of Nisan 14, according to Scripture. At the ninth hour, when the Jews began killing their Passover lambs, Yeshua himself hung on the tree.​

This would mean that Jesus did not eat the Passover.

Well, we never hear about how good the lamb was.

I find that assertion to be ... (ahem) ... untenable, given the testimony of the Synoptics. It is a major concern as to whether Jesus ate the Passover or not, and this issue wasn't even addressed in your article. But those who wish to push the Passover-Lamb-human-blood-sacrifice-payment doctrine would tend to avoid this.

But without the missing lamb chops, who can say?

I found the above article by Coulter to be interesting in that it proposes the following:

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?​

While I have NOT had any time to do "doctoral thesis" research on this, I just wonder if in this particular instance the phrase "between the setting-times" would mean the time between the setting of the sun and the setting of the moon.

Rhema

Yes, I saw your question in the earlier post. Given that the setting of a full moon is about 6 am, the article suggests a way to eliminate the possibility, suggesting that they wouldn't have been killing lambs all night.

 

[Derf]

@Rhema
This comes from a Wikipedia article:
"Jews traditionally observe one seder if in Israel and two (one on each of the first two nights) if in the Jewish diaspora."

I don't know if this translates well into what Jesus and his disciples, not of the diaspora, would do, except if the diaspora maintained the correct tradition from before the diaspora. It is at least interesting that they might have done some meal on the evening of the start of the 14th, then another meal on the next evening, perhaps after the lamb was killed.

 

[Derf]

Another witness https://reformjudaism.org/learning/...ews-have-one-seder-and-others-have-two-seders

"The question of holding one or two seders has to do with timing from when the Torah was written. When the Torah was written, the beginning of the new month was determined by observing the moon. This was done in Jerusalem. Word of the new moon did not always arrive in other cities outside of Israel in time to observe the holiday. For communities outside of Israel, the practice developed of observing an extra day of Yom Tov (holiday, usually a sabbath, from what read) on major holidays to be sure those communities were in sync with Jerusalem. This led to holding two seders in the Diaspora. While Reform Jews observe the first day of Passover as a Yom Tov, some do not observe the second day as a Yom Tov as well."

This doesn't resolve the problem of the previous day meal.

 

[Right Divider]

Another witness https://reformjudaism.org/learning/...ews-have-one-seder-and-others-have-two-seders

"The question of holding one or two seders has to do with timing from when the Torah was written. When the Torah was written, the beginning of the new month was determined by observing the moon. This was done in Jerusalem. Word of the new moon did not always arrive in other cities outside of Israel in time to observe the holiday. For communities outside of Israel, the practice developed of observing an extra day of Yom Tov (holiday, usually a sabbath, from what read) on major holidays to be sure those communities were in sync with Jerusalem. This led to holding two seders in the Diaspora. While Reform Jews observe the first day of Passover as a Yom Tov, some do not observe the second day as a Yom Tov as well."

This doesn't resolve the problem of the previous day meal.

Passover was one of the three feasts that required Jews to be in Jerusalem.

 

[Rhema]

Given that the setting of a full moon is about 6 am,

But Passover was 14 days after the New Moon... so ... half moon.

suggesting that they wouldn't have been killing lambs all night.

But hadn't each family killed their own lamb? (Except for the Temple Guard who were on duty, of course.)

Well, we never hear about how good the lamb was.

So why didn't Jesus grab the leg of lamb, wave it around and say "This is my body..."? ()
Just being humerus here, no one need get offended....

This comes from a Wikipedia article:
"Jews traditionally observe one seder if in Israel and two (one on each of the first two nights) if in the Jewish diaspora."

I've run across that before, but I don't know of any Jews here in my part of the US that have two dinners. Just remember, anybody can put anything in Wiki.

Word of the new moon did not always arrive in other cities outside of Israel in time to observe the holiday.

That's absurd. LOOK UP... one will know if the moon is new. Sometimes those people just cannot think.

Now I can see a couple of Jews arguing if day one of the 14 days starts ON the New Moon or the day AFTER the New Moon... Kind of like, do we "go on three" or do we count "three" and then go...

This doesn't resolve the problem of the previous day meal.

Well that presumes the "they" meant the entire community of the Jews. I don't find that context to be credible. The "they" were the "they" that brought Jesus to Annas, then Caiaphas, then Pilate (the Temple Guard), not all the Jews. (And yes, I'm repeating myself.)

I find it incredulous that somehow Jesus celebrated some secret "real" Passover that nobody knew about, and that the Jews in John had the wrong day... but then Jesus STILL would not have been crucified at the time that the secret "real" Passover lambs were being killed.

Either Jesus ate the Passover (and so was not crucified during the "killing of the lambs") or he did not.

I think that many people let their religious imaginations run wild. (Which would explain Islam and Buddhism, and etc. etc.)

Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Passover was one of the three feasts that required Jews to be in Jerusalem.

I guess Philo was out of luck....

(And every Jew after Hadrian....)

 

[JudgeRightly]

14 days after the New Moon... so ... half moon

14 days (roughly) after a New Moon is a Full Moon, not a Half Moon.

 

[Right Divider]

I guess Philo was out of luck....

(And every Jew after Hadrian....)

I didn't make the rule, God did.

 

[Derf]

But Passover was 14 days after the New Moon... so ... half moon.

As answered by JR, this still puts most of the slaying of lambs at night, which is possible, but seems unlikely.

But hadn't each family killed their own lamb? (Except for the Temple Guard who were on duty, of course.)

They were required to be in Jerusalem, at least the adult males. If the males were in Jerusalem and the families stayed home, then it's possible that they wanted to eat at the same time as their families in Gallilee, but I haven't heard anyone suggest anything like this before.

So why didn't Jesus grab the leg of lamb, wave it around and say "This is my body..."? ()
Just being humerus here, no one need get offended....

That would be femorus, and it was exactly my point. (though I like your RENDition)

I've run across that before, but I don't know of any Jews here in my part of the US that have two dinners. Just remember, anybody can put anything in Wiki.

This my attempt to bring in a second testimony.

That's absurd. LOOK UP... one will know if the moon is new. Sometimes those people just cannot think.

But they wanted the exact date, and new moons happen in the daylight, or just after sunset and just before a quickly following moonset sometimes.

Now I can see a couple of Jews arguing if day one of the 14 days starts ON the New Moon or the day AFTER the New Moon... Kind of like, do we "go on three" or do we count "three" and then go...


Well that presumes the "they" meant the entire community of the Jews. I don't find that context to be credible. The "they" were the "they" that brought Jesus to Annas, then Caiaphas, then Pilate (the Temple Guard), not all the Jews. (And yes, I'm repeating myself.)

Remember how often Jesus taught against their traditions, because the traditions tended to conflict with the intent of God's laws? Maybe that could have happened in the passover date setting. But if that were the case, then Jesus would have been killed in the day after...oh, right, that's what you were suggesting is not credible.

I find it incredulous that somehow Jesus celebrated some secret "real" Passover that nobody knew about, and that the Jews in John had the wrong day... but then Jesus STILL would not have been crucified at the time that the secret "real" Passover lambs were being killed.

Then swap it. Jesus might have been willing to abide by the traditions when he had his last supper (without the lamb), then be killed in the correct day. I don't think it works as well as celebrating the two meals in some way.

Either Jesus ate the Passover (and so was not crucified during the "killing of the lambs") or he did not.

I think that many people let their religious imaginations run wild. (Which would explain Islam and Buddhism, and etc. etc.)

Rhema

You give up too easily.

 

[Rhema]

14 days (roughly) after a New Moon is a Full Moon, not a Half Moon.

That'll teach me to try and do math at 2 in the morning.
(Thank you.)

 

[rstrats]

I personally feel Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday...

How do you reconcile that with Luke 24:21?

 

[Rebel for truth]

The crux of this assertion is....


And upon what basis is A.D. 31 selected as "the year of these events"?

It's an arbitrary and spurious assertion. (But I'll wait for any evidence if @Rebel for truth deigns to reply.)

Thanks,
Rhema

Evidence?????

Different organizations do different studies - I don't.

Two listed below puts the death of Jesus in April on a Friday and AD 33. And because Christianity will never admit if it even discovered it was wrong that Jesus was not crucified on a Friday. 3 days 3 nights does not add up to Sunday.

April 3, AD 33: Why We Believe We Can Know the Exact Date Jesus Died - The Center for Biblical Studies

In our book, The Final Days of Jesus: The Most Important Week of the Most Important Person Who Ever Lived, Justin Taylor and I assume but do not argue for a precise date of Jesus’s crucifixion. Virtually all scholars believe, for various reasons, that Jesus was crucified in the spring of either...

cbs.mbts.edu

7 Clues Tell Us *Precisely* When Jesus Died (the Year, Month, Day and Hour Revealed)

Just how specific can we be with the death of Jesus? Can we determine the exact day?

www.ncregister.com

At least the study below admits it would be between the year ad 30 and AD 33

What year did Jesus die?

What year did Jesus die? When was Jesus' crucifixion? Was Jesus crucified in AD 30 or 33?

www.compellingtruth.org

 

[Rebel for truth]

It's a good thing we don't have to rely on personal feelings for truth then.

I recommend you listen to the show I posted in post #2.

In summary, Jesus was crucified on THURSDAY, because THAT SPECIFIC FRIDAY was a special kind of sabbath day as part of a second calendar the Hebrews used for feasts, and then there was Saturday, a normal sabbath, and then Jesus rose ON the third day, like Scripture says, which was a Sunday, the first day of the week, or rather, on the 8th day of the previous week. 8 is symbolic of new beginnings in Scripture, a "starting over of cycles."

Being crucified on Thursday and rising on Sunday fits with the Biblical narrative, and isn't a matter of opinion or personal feelings.

Thank you but no thank you.
Being risen on a Thursday would support Sunday Resurrection for those who know the days don't add up - I've read those too.

There is other research out there that's also come to the conclusion that Christ was crucified on a Wednesday.
No one requires or ask you to *personally* except it as the truth.

But your *personal* belief is he was crucified on a Thursday (so you have indicated)

Just like you come to your conclusions others who've also done the studying came to theirs and Christ being crucified on a Wednesday and resurrected on the 7 day Sabbath. Some more research

The Resurrection of Jesus was on a Sabbath Morning

God has never left people in confusion or uninformed of the day of the week on which Jesus died and on which he rose from the dead. Nor is it evident from the New Testament (NT) that this question was ever unclear or even an issue in the first Christian church. There are seven clear biblical...

bible-menorah.jimdofree.com

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

Christ’s Resurrection Was Not on Sunday

Did Jesus rise from the grave on Sunday morning? Had He been there for three days and three nights? He said this was the only sign (Matt. 12:40) that He was the Messiah! Does—can—this sign coincide with the tradition of a Good Friday crucifixion near sunset and a sunrise resurrection on Easter...

rcg.org

 

[JudgeRightly]

Thank you but no thank you.

You're not even going to consider the alternative to your beliefs?

Being risen on a Thursday would support Sunday Resurrection for those who know the days don't add up - I've read those too.

Not this one, you haven't.

There is other research out there that's also come to the conclusion that Christ was crucified on a Wednesday.

That "other research" ignores the second Hebrew Feast calendar I mentioned.

No one requires or ask you to *personally* except it as the truth.

*accept

And I agree, truth is truth regardless of whether one accepts it.

But your *personal* belief is he was crucified on a Thursday (so you have indicated)

1) I have stated nothing about my "personal belief."
2) In fact, I've stated the exact opposite! What part of "It's a good thing we don't have to rely on personal feelings for truth then" and "fits with the Biblical narrative, and isn't a matter of opinion or personal feelings" do you not understand?

Just like you come to your conclusions

I'm not the one who came to the conclusion, though. That would be Dr. McMurtry.

others who've also done the studying came to theirs and Christ being crucified on a Wednesday and resurrected on the 7 day Sabbath.

And they're wrong, because they didn't take into account the second Hebrew Calendar for feasts, for one, as well as what the Bible clearly states, and everything else mentioned in the show that you refuse to listen to.

Not only that, but you (and the people you cite) seem to be completely ignoring what is so important about the Sabbath days (both Shabbot and Shabboton).

Some more research

The Resurrection of Jesus was on a Sabbath Morning

God has never left people in confusion or uninformed of the day of the week on which Jesus died and on which he rose from the dead. Nor is it evident from the New Testament (NT) that this question was ever unclear or even an issue in the first Christian church. There are seven clear biblical...

bible-menorah.jimdofree.com

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

Christ’s Resurrection Was Not on Sunday

Did Jesus rise from the grave on Sunday morning? Had He been there for three days and three nights? He said this was the only sign (Matt. 12:40) that He was the Messiah! Does—can—this sign coincide with the tradition of a Good Friday crucifixion near sunset and a sunrise resurrection on Easter...

rcg.org

Why should I bother looking at any of those, when you won't listen to one interview with someone who is highly qualified to speak on the matter? (Doctor of Divinity from the School of Theology in Columbus, GA)

 

[rstrats]

Rebel for truth,​

You have a question directed to you in post #36.