Did Jesus rise Good Friday to Easter Sunday Morning according the Bible?

[CadyandZoe]

I already showed you teh Scriptures.

I was already aware of the Scriptures before you showed them to me. I think you misunderstood what was said.

Yes JOhn was! That is the only proper way to interpret and understand that passage. Any other way alters the rules of grammar.

No. It isn't a matter of grammar. The basis for your mistake is obvious. You wrongly believe that every Sabbath is a Saturday. And you are satisfied with two nights and three partial days.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

No sir. You are mistaken and have misconstrued what John said. And you have it so fixed in your mind, you can't see it any other way.

You mean like you have fixed in your mind and can't see any other way?

You are incorrect on two counts.

1. Sabbath was always a Saturday
This is incorrect. Saturday was the weekly Sabbath. There are Sabbath Days other than the one that occurs every Saturday.

2. High Sabbaths could occur outside of a Sabbath
This is incorrect. Since the High Sabbath IS a Sabbath, then no High Sabbath can occur outside of a Sabbath.

Already addressed these and showed you why you are wrong.

Normal Sabbath is always Saturday. A high Sabbath is the commencement of a feast andthis case was a Saturday in

No, he wasn't. You are mistaken to think that the word "Sabbath" always refers to the weekly Saturday Sabbath. This is incorrect. The days that bracket the Week of Unleavened Bread are also called "Sabbaths". And John reminds us that these two days are called "High Sabbaths" in order to distinguish them from the regular Sabbath.

Already told you that the commencement, and in the case of unleavened bread the last day, are called Sabbaths and do not always fall on Saturdays.

My view is perfectly compatible with grammar.

Yes, it is, just not the grammar found in the passage we are discussing. Let us look at your contention that Jesus did not die on Friday, but died on Wednesday as you contend. Let us also assume the Sabbath John is speaking of in the passage is the feast of unleavened bread. so let us write the passage according to your contention, after we cite the passage as written. Let us also remember that any Sabbath outside of the normal usual understrood day as Saturday was called a high Sabbath so we shall call it that as well.

John 19:31
The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

Now as you say it is actually:

"The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the High Sabbath day,(for that high Sabbath day was a high Sabbath), besought Pilate.......

That is grammatic nonsense. As well as linguistic nonsense. We know this by that little word "that". It singles out the Sabbath as a distinct Sabbath. IOW it is simply not a normal Saturday Sabbath, But a high Sabbath!

John is talking about the "Shabbat ha-Gadol" -- the Great Sabbath. The Feast of Unleavened Bread lasts for seven days, beginning on the 15th day of Nisan and continuing until the 21st day. Both the 15th and the 21st of Nissan are "Shabbat ha-Gadol." During this time period, the first and the last days are considered Sabbaths, distinct from the weekly Sabbath (Saturday), and they occur on any day of the week. Regardless of the specific day, the same rules apply: rest and keep the day holy.

That is why John said that "that Sabbath was a Shabbot ha-gadol and you are wrong on the dates. Pesach (Passover) always falls on Nisan 15 and Pesach falls 16-22. the seder starts on NIsan 14 and carries over after sunset which makes it the 15th

"All four Gospels state that Jesus was crucified on the Day of Preparation (Matthew 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:14, 31, 42). Mark, Luke, and John all state that the following day was the Sabbath. John’s account uses this wording: “It was the day of Preparation of the Passover” (John 19:14). The question becomes, since Jesus was killed on the Day of Preparation, why had He already observed the Passover with His disciples (Matthew 26:17–29; Mark 14:12–25; Luke 22:7–22; John 13:1–30)?

First, we should discard the theory that the writers of the New Testament made a mistake. Theorizing that all four of the Gospel writers got the chronology wrong stretches credulity to the breaking point. Are we really to believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all forgot what they had written from one chapter to the next? No, there must be a better explanation for why Jesus ate the Passover before the Day of Preparation.

Next, we need to identify what the Day of Preparation was preparing for. Every week, preparations had to be made for the Sabbath—food had to be prepared ahead of time. This led to the “Day of Preparation” becoming the common term for “Friday.” Although many preparations also had to be made for the Passover, there is no record of “Passover Eve” being called the Day of Preparation. The Day of Preparation was always Friday, the day before the Sabbath. Mark 15:42 makes this clear.

How then do we explain John’s statement that Jesus died on “the day of Preparation of the Passover” (John 19:14)? It’s quite possible that John simply meant that this particular Friday fell during Passover week; we could understand his words this way: “It was the day of Preparation, the one that happened to come during the season of Passover.” So, the Day of Preparation was to prepare for the Sabbath, not the Passover.

The Mosaic Law stipulated what day the Passover lamb was to be eaten: Nissan 14 (Numbers 9:2–3). We must assume that Jesus kept the Law and observed Passover at the appointed time (see Galatians 4:4). After the Passover (Thursday) came the Day of Preparation (Friday) on which Jesus was killed. The Sabbath (Saturday) followed, of course, and then the first day of the week (Sunday)—the third day after the crucifixion and the day on which Jesus rose from the dead.

One objection to the above chronology is based on John 18:28, which says, “The Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness they did not enter the palace, because they wanted to be able to eat the Passover.” At first glance, it seems that, whereas Jesus had eaten the Passover the night before, the Jewish leaders had not yet eaten the Passover—they still “wanted to be able to eat” it after Jesus was arrested. To reconcile this verse with the Synoptic narratives, we must remember this: Passover was the first day of the week-long Feast of Unleavened Bread."

Here is how the passion week looked when Jesus was crucified.

14th -- Passover -- Day of preparation -- crucifixion
15th -- Thursday -- "Shabbat ha-Gadol"
16th -- Friday day of preparation
17th -- Saturday -- Shabbat -- Weekly Sabbath
18th -- Sunday -- Resurrection Day.

Of course you are free to think that, but not according to Scripture--

Once again to read John as you demand it--

John 19:31
The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the high Sabbath day, (for that high sabbath day was an high Sabbath day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

I know you know that is an absurd rendering.
"

 

[Ronald Nolette]

John didn't mention Saturday. You are wrongly assuming it was a Saturday.

He mentions a Sabbath. Sabbath as rendered is always Saturday, Then He says that particular Sabbath (Saturday ) was a Shabbot ha-Gadol. YOu demand that the 2 mentyions of Sabbath should actually be Shabbat-ha-Gadol as well as the high day rendered as shabbat-ha-Gadol.

It isn't a matter of grammar.

But it is! God created grammar and its rules so we could understand each other effectively and clearly.

I reject your proposal because it has John reiterating the evident.

Wrong again. We can post this passage as thus:

John 19:31
The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day,besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

And this would be a fully accurate statement.

HOWEVER:

JOhn decided to add the parenthetical , "because that Sabbath was a high day," to emphasize it was the first day of unleavened bread. With the little word "that" John was emphasizing that something was different about that Sabbath from the others. It was a Shabbat-ha-Gadol beginning one of the seven feasts of Israel.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I was already aware of the Scriptures before you showed them to me. I think you misunderstood what was said.

Well I read them as written and as written it shows friday-sunday.

No. It isn't a matter of grammar. The basis for your mistake is obvious. You wrongly believe that every Sabbath is a Saturday. And you are satisfied with two nights and three partial days.

Now you are lying! I already told I know there are seven Sabbaths that are called Shabbat-ha Gadol. They are not simply called Shabbat, but shabbat -ha-Gadol. They are not usual Shabbat but a high day thus the added "ha-Gadol".

And yes having studied under a believer who had been studying and preparing to be a chief rebbe and has lived in Israel and has a masters in Jewish history and culture and lived in Jewish communities in other parts of the world, I know that any part of a day in Jewish conversation is considered a day.

Matthew 27:63
Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.

Mark 8:31
And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Matthew 16:21
From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Matthew 17:23
And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.

Matthew 20:19
And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.

Matthew 27:64
Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.

Mark 9:31
For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.

Luke 13:32
And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.

Matthew 12:40
For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.


These all say the same thing to a Jew. Any part of a day was considered a whole day = so Friday to Sunday was three dayes, the third day or three days and nights.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You mean like you have fixed in your mind and can't see any other way?

No, I was talking about you actually. I presented proof which you chose to ingore.

Normal Sabbath is always Saturday. A high Sabbath is the commencement of a feast andthis case was a Saturday in

Again, if the High Sabbath fell on a Saturday, there would be NO need for John to mention it.

Yes, it is, just not the grammar found in the passage we are discussing. Let us look at your contention that Jesus did not die on Friday, but died on Wednesday as you contend. Let us also assume the Sabbath John is speaking of in the passage is the feast of unleavened bread. so let us write the passage according to your contention, after we cite the passage as written. Let us also remember that any Sabbath outside of the normal usual understrood day as Saturday was called a high Sabbath so we shall call it that as well.

John 19:31

That is grammatic nonsense.

Yeah. That is your grammatic nonsense. You invented that.

As well as linguistic nonsense. We know this by that little word "that". It singles out the Sabbath as a distinct Sabbath. IOW it is simply not a normal Saturday Sabbath, But a high Sabbath!

That's what I said, It was not a normal Sabbath.

That is why John said that "that Sabbath was a Shabbot ha-gadol and you are wrong on the dates.

John clarified that the Shabbat in question was NOT a regular, weekday Sabbath. He isn't saying that the Shabbat-Hagada fell on a Saturday as you suggest. Your argument doesn't rest on grammar, it rests on an incorrect assumption.

Pesach (Passover) always falls on Nisan 15 and Pesach falls 16-22. the seder starts on NIsan 14 and carries over after sunset which makes it the 15th

That's right. And Nisan 15 begins at twilight on the 14th.

"All four Gospels state that Jesus was crucified on the Day of Preparation (Matthew 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:14, 31, 42). Mark, Luke, and John all state that the following day was the Sabbath. John’s account uses this wording: “It was the day of Preparation of the Passover” (John 19:14). The question becomes, since Jesus was killed on the Day of Preparation, why had He already observed the Passover with His disciples (Matthew 26:17–29; Mark 14:12–25; Luke 22:7–22; John 13:1–30)?

Because "The Week of Unleavened Bread" was also known as "The Week of Passover." The entire week is often called "Passover" even though the actual day of Passover is one day.

No, there must be a better explanation for why Jesus ate the Passover before the Day of Preparation.

They are the same day. The day of preparation is the very same day as the Passover.

Next, we need to identify what the Day of Preparation was preparing for.

Preparation was being made for the First day of Unleavened Bread, which was Shabbat-Hagadon.

The Day of Preparation was always Friday, the day before the Sabbath. Mark 15:42 makes this clear.

Friday was the day of preparation for the Sabbath that occurred on Saturday.

How then do we explain John’s statement that Jesus died on “the day of Preparation of the Passover” (John 19:14)?

This particular day of preparation was antecedent to the Shabbat-Hagadon, which began sundown Wednesday and ended on sundown Thursday.

The Mosaic Law stipulated what day the Passover lamb was to be eaten: Nissan 14 (Numbers 9:2–3).

Yes, Nissan 14 AT SUNDOWN. Jesus ate the Passover meal with his disciples at Sundown on Tuesday. That night, he was arrested and interrogated all night until sunlight on Wednesday.

We must assume that Jesus kept the Law and observed Passover at the appointed time (see Galatians 4:4). After the Passover (Thursday) came the Day of Preparation (Friday) on which Jesus was killed. The Sabbath (Saturday) followed, of course, and then the first day of the week (Sunday)—the third day after the crucifixion and the day on which Jesus rose from the dead.

You still only have two nights.

One objection to the above chronology is based on John 18:28, which says, “The Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness they did not enter the palace, because they wanted to be able to eat the Passover.” At first glance, it seems that, whereas Jesus had eaten the Passover the night before, the Jewish leaders had not yet eaten the Passover—they still “wanted to be able to eat” it after Jesus was arrested. To reconcile this verse with the Synoptic narratives, we must remember this: Passover was the first day of the week-long Feast of Unleavened Bread."

Actually, the first of Unleavened bread is the Shabbat-Hagadol of the feast. The explanation for the confusion is that John is refering to the entire 8 day period as "Passover." One didn't need to be ceremonially clean in order to eat the Passover. But one needed to be ceremonially clean in order to eat the meal associated with the Shabbat-Hagadol.

Of course you are free to think that, but not according to Scripture--

Once again to read John as you demand it--

John 19:31
The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the high Sabbath day, (for that high sabbath day was an high Sabbath day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

I know you know that is an absurd rendering.
"

That is, of course, YOUR absurd rendering.

Here is how you are reading it.

Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on (a Saturday) (for that Saturday was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

You see, it isn't a matter of grammar. Its a matter of you inserting meaning into the text that John didn't intend.

Based on the book of Leviticus we could paraphrase John's message this way.

Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on [a day of convocation] (for that [day of convocation] was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

There is a day of preparation for the Shabbat and the Shabbat-Hagadol. If Jesus was on the cross on the day of preparation antecedent to a regular weekly Sabbath, he wouldn't need to say anything further.

Consider this reading.
Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on [a Sabbath] asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

If the reason for breaking the legs of the convicted was so that they weren't left on the cross on a Saturday Sabbath, then the above wording is sufficient to make that point. Suggesting that the day was also a high day is superfluous information and unnecessary elaboration. John's mention was so that his readers might know that the legs were broken so that people wouldn't be left on the cross during a Shabbat-Hagadol. The additional information was given because the information was important for other reasons.



The reason why John had to explain things is because his readers would have known that the

 

[CadyandZoe]

Well I read them as written and as written it shows friday-sunday.

Again, your interpretation has two nights not three: Friday night and Saturday night are two nights. That's where you should begin. You haven't got the number of nights and so you should stop and figure out your mistake. Simple as that.

Now you are lying! I already told I know there are seven Sabbaths that are called Shabbat-ha Gadol. They are not simply called Shabbat, but shabbat -ha-Gadol. They are not usual Shabbat but a high day thus the added "ha-Gadol".

You didn't mention it until I proved this to you. But who cares? This knowledge isn't helping you with your mistaken interpretation, which only acounts for two nights.

And yes having studied under a believer who had been studying and preparing to be a chief rebbe and has lived in Israel and has a masters in Jewish history and culture and lived in Jewish communities in other parts of the world, I know that any part of a day in Jewish conversation is considered a day.

Not in the Bible.

These all say the same thing to a Jew. Any part of a day was considered a whole day = so Friday to Sunday was three dayes, the third day or three days and nights.

So you say. But you still have only two nights. Figure it out.

 

[CadyandZoe]

He mentions a Sabbath. Sabbath as rendered is always Saturday, Then He says that particular Sabbath (Saturday ) was a Shabbot ha-Gadol. YOu demand that the 2 mentyions of Sabbath should actually be Shabbat-ha-Gadol as well as the high day rendered as shabbat-ha-Gadol.

No, that is not what I said or meant. Please.

But it is! God created grammar and its rules so we could understand each other effectively and clearly.

Just because God gave us grammar doesn't mean that every disagreement over interpretation is the result of grammar.

JOhn decided to add the parenthetical , "because that Sabbath was a high day," to emphasize it was the first day of unleavened bread.

No. John tells you why he mentioned it and it was NOT for emphasis. There were three Sabbath days that week John wanted his readers to know which one in order to explain why the legs of Jesus were broken.

With the little word "that" John was emphasizing that something was different about that Sabbath from the others.

Of course, but John was not saying why that Saturday was different than the others. It isn't a matter of grammar. It's a matter of you inserting ideas that aren't there.

 

[bro.tan]

Let's do a recap, because Jesus foretold when His death would occur. Also by Jesus being the Passover himself, Jesus had to come off the cross because, Sundown bring in the feast of unleavened Bread. Let’s take a look and see in John 19: 31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

In (Matthew 26:1) And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples, (2) Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

Now remember God's days start at evening and end the next evening. Keep that in mind as you view the next set of scriptures. Jesus had been betrayed by Judas the evening of the Passover. John 13 tells how Jesus and His disciples, that evening, were sharing the Passover meal. John (18:3) shows that same evening; Jesus was betrayed and taken away. It was still nighttime when they took Jesus, because the men that came and took and bound Him had lanterns and torches.

Jesus was crucified the next day but it was still the Passover. Remember God's days run from sundown to sundown. Jesus had been taken into custody the night of the Passover and the next morning which is the day of the Passover, He was condemned and crucified.

Jesus says in (Matthew 12:38) Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. 39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Now in the scriptures it's written in Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week (Wednesday is the middle of the week) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, (Remember, Jesus is the sacrificial Passover Lamb).

So Jesus would Have been in the Grave Wednesday night, Thursday daytime and Thursday night, Friday daytime, Friday night, Saturday daytime and Jesus rose right before the sun went down on Saturday. Hence one has the 3 days and 3 nights which Jesus prophesied. His death Wednesday night is consistent with the comment of the prophet Daniel, stating the Messiah would be cut off (killed) in the midst of the week.

(John 20:1) 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. (2) 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.

Jesus couldn't rise just any day, it had to be the seventh day which is Saturday today. Sunday represent the first fruit, Jesus had ascend to the Father for waving of the first fruit, that's why Jesus told Mary in John 20: 16 Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master. 17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Paul also talks about this in 1 Corinthians 15: 20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

But now the Sabbath day also carries it own meaning and future prophecy. The Sabbath represent the end flesh and or man kind. Also the Sabbath day represent the time Jesus will reign on earth for thousand years, which is 7000 yrs starting from Adam. Because in 2 Peter 3: 8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. So in Genesis 1: And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day…etc.

Keeping the weekly Sabbath day on the seventh day of the week represent this time period and coming up in the first resurrection. And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. (Revelation 20: 4, 5)

Again this thousand yrs represent the 7000 yr man has been on the earth, and so this is the big Sabbath day. I see most people are taught Roman Christianity teaching so most of this may go over people head.

peace in Jesus name

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

If I understand your other information, the day of preparation was the fifth day of the week which would place it on a Thursday and as that was the day that the Passover lamb was killed on, then Christ must have been also crucified on the Thursday and died just after the 9th hour of the day had passed.

Correct. You read me right. But you don't read the same in Scripture, you say? Then why be cross at me?
When the Bible speaks of only one Sabbath, all the world says no, there were two and more sorts of Sabbaths---and no one gets angry;
But when the Bible speaks of TWO days of the week as days of some "Preparation" significance, the whole world goes up in arms against the poor fool who thus dares speak whether or not he has Scripture Sword to cut myriads opposing tongues right off, like 2Chronicles 35 for Abib 14 being "the day of Preparation OF THE PASSOVER", same as Exodus 12:14, 17 - in John 19:14 being the day the passover lamb was killed on in Mark 14, Matthew 26, Luke 22, John 13 to ch.18. . . NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH the Preparation (day Friday which followed after) and began in Mark 15:42f Matthew 27:57f Luke 23:50f John 13:1f "SINCE EVENING HAD COME ALREADY".

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

In (Matthew 26:1) And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples, (2) Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

Besides many other objection to your casual approach to these Scriptures, one of them will suffice to boot you off your wobbling rhetorical podium: this translation basis for the platform you stand on.
In order of both Old and New Testament 1. Text, 2. historical event, 3. logical order, 4. prophesy foretold. . .
Place side by side the one after the other and READ for yourself. . .
Last Week:
TUESDAY : TEACHING 3 days before (Friday) Abib 15 is Abib 12 Mark 11:20 “early ... fig tree dried up” = Matthew 26:1-2 “AFTER TWO DAYS ... CRUCIFIED” = Matthew 21:18-22; 45,46 “in the morning ... fig tree” cursed and “immediately dried up” Mark 11:27,28 “in Jerusalem in TEMPLE ... by what AUTHORITY” = Matthew 21:23-25 “in temple ... what authority” = Luke 20:1-8 “one of Those Days ... what authority” Mark 12:35-37 “Jesus in the temple ... Dawid” = Matthew 22:23; 41-46 “the Same Day” = Matthew 24:1-3 “out of tempel … not be left one stone … on Mount of Olives disciples came privately” = John 12:27-36 “this hour ... if I be lifted up from the earth” = Luke 21:34-38 “on One of Those Days ... Watch that That Day come not upon you unawares”

Last Week:
WEDNESDAY : 2 days before (Friday) Abib 15 is Abib 13 Mark 14:1,2 “AFTER TWO DAYS WAS THE UNLEAVENED (feast days)” “sought how might take him ... not on feast” = Matthew 26:3-5 “consulted that they might take Jesus ... not on feast” = Luke 22:1,2 “feast drew near

Help: the word "feast" is added wrongly in Mark 11:20 and Matthew 26:1-2

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

(Hope this works)
My intent is to insert my chart for your review. Since I am visually oriented, I can follow this chart easier than a verbal description.

View attachment 44130
The women buy spices to anoint Jesus on Friday before sundown.

I realize you are honest and sincere.
However, not what I'm saying, but from the nature of the issue, there is and can be only one measure of rule, and that is. . . Jesus' words, Luke 24: "that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. . . . Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:" in order of both Old and New Testament 1. Text, 2. historical event, 3. logical order, 4. prophesy "thus" foretold. . .
This being the criteria for testing everyone's view, can you honestly and sincere say. . . let's begin here. . . <The women buy spices to anoint Jesus on Friday before sundown.>
Now,
1. IT IS NOT WRITTEN
<The women> MERELY where it is written they "bought spices" WHO were these women? [Mark16:1-2]
2. IT IS NOT WRITTEN <to anoint Jesus on Friday but "that when they might go they might anoint him... ON THE FIRST DAY of the week" [Mark 16:2-3 and Luke 16:1-2]
3. IT IS NOT WRITTEN <The women buy spices to anoint Jesus on Friday before sundown> wherever for whatever reason at all.

Therefore, CandyandZoe, your illustration does not help to understand correctly, but helps to misunderstand completely, I'm very sorry.
But if you stick with the only rule of Truth, "that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. . . . Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:" in order of both Old and New Testament 1. Text, 2. historical event, 3. logical order, 4. prophesy "thus" foretold. . . YOU CANNOT GO WRONG AND CANNOT BUT REACH CORRECT IMPRESSION.
GOD BLESS

 

[Ronald Nolette]

No, I was talking about you actually. I presented proof which you chose to ingore.

But it was proof that is incongruous with Scripture and history.

Again, if the High Sabbath fell on a Saturday, there would be NO need for John to mention it.

Of course he would have! for that sabbath was not a usual Sabbath but a high Sabbath, just as He wrote. Writing the passage according to your hypothesis is what doesn't make sense.

Actually, the first of Unleavened bread is the Shabbat-Hagadol of the feast. The explanation for the confusion is that John is refering to the entire 8 day period as "Passover." One didn't need to be ceremonially clean in order to eat the Passover. But one needed to be ceremonially clean in order to eat the meal associated with the Shabbat-Hagadol.

Of course I know that. And in Israel they only celebrate unleavened bread as a 7 day feast while outside of Israel they celebrate 8 days as Pesach.

No. John tells you why he mentioned it and it was NOT for emphasis. There were three Sabbath days that week John wanted his readers to know which one in order to explain why the legs of Jesus were broken.

Wrong again. that little word "that" em[phasizes the normal Sabbath as a high day.

We need to put this to bed. all we will do is go round and round. We are both convinced and nothing will change your mind nor will anything change mine.

It is not a big ewnough deal (althoug as a teacher I like correctness) to take up so much space.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Something else, one who is not ever wrong not ever is right and not ever CAN COME right.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Again, if the High Sabbath fell on a Saturday, there would be NO need for John to mention it.

Excellent! This is logic, and this is historicity. I elate in this kind of research and conclusion. God bless

 

[CadyandZoe]

I realize you are honest and sincere.
However, not what I'm saying, but from the nature of the issue, there is and can be only one measure of rule, and that is. . . Jesus' words, Luke 24: "that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. . . . Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:" in order of both Old and New Testament 1. Text, 2. historical event, 3. logical order, 4. prophesy "thus" foretold. . .
This being the criteria for testing everyone's view, can you honestly and sincere say. . . let's begin here. . . <The women buy spices to anoint Jesus on Friday before sundown.>
Now,
1. IT IS NOT WRITTEN
<The women> MERELY where it is written they "bought spices" WHO were these women? [Mark16:1-2]
2. IT IS NOT WRITTEN <to anoint Jesus on Friday but "that when they might go they might anoint him... ON THE FIRST DAY of the week" [Mark 16:2-3 and Luke 16:1-2]
3. IT IS NOT WRITTEN <The women buy spices to anoint Jesus on Friday before sundown> wherever for whatever reason at all.

Therefore, CandyandZoe, your illustration does not help to understand correctly, but helps to misunderstand completely, I'm very sorry.
But if you stick with the only rule of Truth, "that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. . . . Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:" in order of both Old and New Testament 1. Text, 2. historical event, 3. logical order, 4. prophesy "thus" foretold. . . YOU CANNOT GO WRONG AND CANNOT BUT REACH CORRECT IMPRESSION.
GOD BLESS

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you are trying to say.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

That is grammatic nonsense. As well as linguistic nonsense. We know this by that little word "that". It singles out the Sabbath as a distinct Sabbath. IOW it is simply not a normal Saturday Sabbath, But a high Sabbath!

What does <that little word "that"> got to do with <grammar>? That, is <grammatic as well as linguistic nonsense>!
What you, do not know, is that by that little word "that", there is a lot of historic and etymological RELEVANCE involved, namely, John 19:31 and Luke 23:54 KJAV, "THAT DAY" is fulfilment usage of the Hebrew "BONE-DAY" - 'etsem yohm' - "THIS IS THAT SELFSAME BONE ESSENTIAL DAY" of Exodus 12:14 "14And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the LORD", "41And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt. 42It is a night to be much observed unto the LORD for bringing them out from the land of Egypt: this is that night of the LORD to be observed".

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you are trying to say.

You will not understand, you will not even try to understand. Be that what it may, I have told you.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

"That Day" of Jesus' live Suffering of death and Dying of death,
was the OT prophetic "SELFSAME BONE ESSENTIAL DAY"
of JESUS' ENTERING IN UPON SALVATION AND REDEMPTION
"in the Kingdom of My Father";
and
"That Day" of Jesus' Hanging on the cross, dead, and of Interment,
was the OT prophetic "SELFSAME BONE ESSENTIAL DAY"
of Jesus' "GOINGS FORTH OUT OF the land of Egypt" and
of the living in sin in the kingdom of darkness;
and
"That Day" of Jesus' Rest, Reviving and Resurrection,
was the OT prophetic "SELFSAME BONE ESSENTIAL DAY"
of Jesus' "coming up out from the Red Sea and being PLANTED upon
the shores of the Land of Canaan in the Promised Land.
Sela

 

[CadyandZoe]

Of course he would have! for that sabbath was not a usual Sabbath but a high Sabbath, just as He wrote. Writing the passage according to your hypothesis is what doesn't make sense.

Where we differ is this. You incorrectly believe that the High Sabbath fell on a Saturday. There is nothing in the text to suggest that the High Sabbath fell on a Saturday. In fact, if the High Sabbath fell on a Saturday, there would be NO reason to mention it.

You don't seem to understand the significance of my point. So let me go over this in greater detail. (I give a link to an article that explains this further.)

Quote from the Article.

God Himself gave the instructions about the use of the preparation day to the Israelites before they reached Mount Sinai (Exodus 16:23). The Jews later considered this to be so important that they made sure each of the holy days, which are also Sabbaths, was preceded by a preparation day. Since the holy days can fall on any day of the week, the preparation day can fall on any day of the week as well.​

According to the article, with which I agree, a Sabbath can fall on any day of the week. The regular weekly Sabbath falls on a Saturday, but other Sabbaths fall on other days of the week. I believe John chose to differentiate the Sabbaths for that reason.

Let's assume that the Shabbat-Hagadol was on a Saturday that year. If that were the case, John would not need to differentiate between the two kinds of Sabbath. In order to show you this is the case, I will quote the verse, leaving out mention of the High Day. As you can see from the following paraphrase, John's statement remains true.

Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.​

​

The sentence above is true, even with the mention of the "high day" removed. The day of preparation always comes before a Sabbath, whether on a Saturday or any other day of the week. And it will always be true that the Jews will want the bodies removed from the cross before the Sabbath begins whether we are talking about the weekly Shabbat or the Shabbat-Hagadol.

Since the bodies would be removed whether it was a Shabbat or a Shabbat-Hagadol, then we understand why John mentioned the fact that the day was Shabbat-Hagadol. His only reason to identify that day as Shabbat-Hagadol is because it wasn't a Saturday. Follow me? The purpose of John's comment is to differentiate between a weekly Sabbath and a High Sabbath. If the high day fell on a Saturday, there would be no reason to differentiate between them because with regard to a day of preparation, there is no distinction to be made. John mentioned that the day was Shabbat-Hagadol because it didn't fall on a Saturday.

It's as if a father was trying to explain the crucifixion account to his son.

Father: The day of preparation took place on Tuesday.
Son: Why Father? I thought the day of preparation was always on Friday.
Father: The day of preparation took place on Tuesday because Wednesday was a High Day.

What the Bible says about Preparation Day.

We are both convinced and nothing will change your mind nor will anything change mine.

If I believed that, I would no longer post on message boards. I have hope that people are still willing to listen to each other. If not, let me know now.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

We need to put this to bed. all we will do is go round and round. We are both convinced and nothing will change your mind nor will anything change mine.

No, this is what YOU ought to do, to put this to bed because all you always do is go round and round. You are only convinced of and by your own superficial views over nothing, and nothing will change your mind. Which is so unbelievable BECAUSE FOR ONCE YOU ARE SO RIGHT---<for that sabbath was not a usual Sabbath but a high Sabbath>. I give up. Why can't you see the rest? It's just Scripture!