On What day did YOUR Messiah Die?

[FHII]

I have read that too many times. I dont know who started (and realy want to know). Who did started it, did decieve all of you, being all of you victims of him.
Luke 23.55-56 is saying that after Jesus were put in the sepulcre, the women did retur home and prepare the species they had at hand. Because sabbath was coming and was not possible to buy more species.
Mark 16:1 is after the sabbath, the first day of the day, when the women had the possiblility to buy more species. Probably - just probably - the women did buy the species they needed in addition, on our Sat after sunset, wich is no longer sabbath, and they went to the sepulcre very early in the morning, still dark after finish preaparing the species.
The decieving of that first brother is to take the verses oiut of contex and put them backward. Doing that dirty trick it seems that the women did buy the specias after one sabbath - the High Sabbath on Thu according to him; and went back home because it was coming a new sabbath - Sat according to him. If you are honest and read the verses in its context you will discover his low move.

Any how, Mathew 28:1, in the original greek - it is wasy to chek it out - is saying "after the sabbaths", using sabbaths in plural. Matthew is refering ton two consecutive days being both sabbaths. From the cross to the resurrection it was a continuous sabbath condition. Matthew is more clear in 27:62. He is clearly mentioning, by a twisted talk that after the dead, it was a high sabbath, followed by a saturday sabbath in 28:1.

Calling what the scriptures actually say deceptive and a dirty trick still doesn't answer the question of how these things are. Neither does leaving things up to merely "possibitities or probablys. I will not deal with the type of thinking that involves "well, maybe this happened..." Lets look at the scripture:



Luk 23:5And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

The women prepared the spices and ointments then rested the sabbath day. It does not say "then", true... But that is the order of events that is given. Luke does not say when the women bought the spices nor does he say they already had them. However Mark does:

Mar 16:1

And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

This is clear. The sabbath past and THEN they bough the spices. So again, how did they buy the spices after the sabbath and prepare them before the sabbath? If there were two consecutive sabbaths, they couldn't have done this. It is only possible it there was a non sabbath day between two sabbaths. Its not trickery, its not deception... It is what it says.

As for Matt 28:1...

Mat 28:1





In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher.



I only see sabbath as singular. I checked strong's greek and there is no indication that it is plural except that there is an intraval between two sabbaths. If two sabbaths are back to back, there is no intraval.

 

[Goinheix]

Are you sure you know anything about the Hebrew calendar and what it prophesies, or are you going to go by your interpretation?

I am not going by my interpretation. Perhaps you can share with all of us the description of Moses on how the passover week is suposed to be observed.

I don't need the new Testament to know what day Christ was going to die in other words. It was there in the scripture long before the New Testament was written, and long before Christ came to this earth in bodily form. This is why I won't even begin to debate the New Testament. And the Jews have been unknowingly practicing it for years without understanding the significance. They slaughtered the Lamb on the night of Nisan 14th as it was ending. Simple as that.

I have figured out already, you dont need or care for the Nt that according to you is not ispired is not scripture. I figured out that for you it has more authority the Wikipedia than the NT and the Gospels.

Calling what the scriptures actually say deceptive and a dirty trick still doesn't answer the question of how these things are. Neither does leaving things up to merely "possibitities or probablys. I will not deal with the type of thinking that involves "well, maybe this happened..." Lets look at the scripture:



Luk 23:5And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

The women prepared the spices and ointments then rested the sabbath day. It does not say "then", true... But that is the order of events that is given. Luke does not say when the women bought the spices nor does he say they already had them. However Mark does:

Mar 16:1

And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

This is clear. The sabbath past and THEN they bough the spices. So again, how did they buy the spices after the sabbath and prepare them before the sabbath? If there were two consecutive sabbaths, they couldn't have done this. It is only possible it there was a non sabbath day between two sabbaths. Its not trickery, its not deception... It is what it says.

As for Matt 28:1...

Mat 28:1



In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher.



I only see sabbath as singular. I checked strong's greek and there is no indication that it is plural except that there is an intraval between two sabbaths. If two sabbaths are back to back, there is no intraval.

 

[FHII]

The Gospels - despite not hjaving the authority of Wikipedia and not being inspired as the Old testament is.....

Goinheix,

I remember that English is not your first language and I'm taking that into consideration. But I have to ask you if you are serious in this statement. The Gospels don't have the authority of Wikipedia? Wikipedia is one of the most questionable (however, easy to use) encyclopedias. Even so, Are you suggesting that the Gospels don't have the authority of ANY encyclopedia? And they aren't as inspired as the Old Testament is? Again, are you serious?

I will take into consideration the language barrier. But if this is really what you believe, then despite how sincere you are and how nice of a guy you are, I cannot take anything you say seriously concerning the gospels.

 

[Goinheix]

Calling what the scriptures actually say deceptive and a dirty trick still doesn't answer the question of how these things are. Neither does leaving things up to merely "possibitities or probablys. I will not deal with the type of thinking that involves "well, maybe this happened..." Lets look at the scripture:



Luk 23:5And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

The women prepared the spices and ointments then rested the sabbath day. It does not say "then", true... But that is the order of events that is given. Luke does not say when the women bought the spices nor does he say they already had them. However Mark does:

Mar 16:1

And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

This is clear. The sabbath past and THEN they bough the spices. So again, how did they buy the spices after the sabbath and prepare them before the sabbath? If there were two consecutive sabbaths, they couldn't have done this. It is only possible it there was a non sabbath day between two sabbaths. Its not trickery, its not deception... It is what it says.

As for Matt 28:1...

Mat 28:1



In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher.



I only see sabbath as singular. I checked strong's greek and there is no indication that it is plural except that there is an intraval between two sabbaths. If two sabbaths are back to back, there is no intraval.

Ok let read the Gospels as they are written, with not personal adding or guessing or interpreting:

Luke say that once the women saw Jesus being put in the sepulcre, the day of his dead, they (the women) went to prepare species and rest for the incoming sabbath.

Mark is saying that once the sabbath ended, being the first day of the week, the women did buy species and them when to the sepulcre.


Lets make fit this into a Wed theory:
Jesus died on Wed, and was put in the sepulcre on Wed, and the women were watching that Wed, and same Wed they preapered species and rested for the incoming sabbath.
Next day what is Thu is sabbath.
Next day is Fri, and a normal day in wich for no reasons the women didnt do anything at all.
Next day is Sat, wich is offcourse a sabbath.
Once the sabbath ended and the first day of the week comes (Sun) the women bought species and when to the sepulcre.


Now make it fit with the Thu theory.
Jesus died on Thu, and was put in the sepulcre on Thu, and the women were watching that Thu, and the same Thu they prepared species and rested for the incoming sabbath.
Next day what is Fri is sabbath.
Next day is Sat, wich is offcourse a sabbath.
Once the sabbath ended and the first day of the week comes (Sun) the women bought species and whent to the sepulcre.


In the Wed theory we have a full Fri in wich we dont understand why the women didnt go to the sepulcre. Also we dont understand the reference of Matthew for tow consecutives sabbaths.

In the Thu theory we have the two consecutive sabbaths that Matthew refers to.

For seen that sabbatrhs in plural check the original greek and leran about declinations and how greek form plurals. Sorry for KJV but the original greek is plural and there is not any doubt on that.

 

[tim_from_pa]

I just posted the Moses Law concerning the Passover Fest. Aparently you think that Moses was wrong and stablishing a week long passover with one lamb each day was a mistake of him. The fact is that in a chronologically order, first was the passover at Egypt, later cames the passover of the Law. Wheter you like it or not, the stablished passover is the passover of the Law. Nowhere the Israelites were told to copy the first passover at Egypt. They were told to observ the passover as stablished by Moses. Even the Israelites of the days of Jesus were keeping the passover as Moses stablished in the Law, not as a exact copy of what realy hapens in Egypt.

Forum alert! Red Flags! There's only one Passover! but this person is saying that the Israelites celebrated Passover one way, and then later another way. There is NOTHING in Scripture that states that. And there is NOTHING in the scripture he gave to contradict what I said, and in fact, the scripture he gave SUPPORTS what I said, and not contradicts it. He's making a case that there is a different Passover because there was a lamb sacrificed every day, so Christ could "pick" the day. Well, the other feasts required an offering every day as well, but that does not nullify that there are in fact certain feast days special above other days, and days following it are part of the ceremony week, not to take the place of the feast days.

So, there is your answer. HE WOULD offer the lamb according to his own calendar date on a day other than the Lord commanded him rather than the 14th, so the death angel would do his job. No sense in debating the dead.

Additionally, I am not convinced he knows the Jewish calendar, nor what it represented, since my original point about the Exodus was not answered, but rather quoted over by something else as if to change what God has said, but in fact, that passage as I already stated does not contradict it.

I will apreciate in you refarse your question. I really dont get it.

Yes, you really don't get it, so you should be more humble and not take your interpretations and twist Scripture to fit your notions. It's sounding dumber and dumber by the minute. I don't even know why I am wasting my time debating this nonsense which is obviously and objectively in error.

 

[FHII]

Ok let read the Gospels as they are written, with not personal adding or guessing or interpreting:

Luke say that once the women saw Jesus being put in the sepulcre, the day of his dead, they (the women) went to prepare species and rest for the incoming sabbath.

Mark is saying that once the sabbath ended, being the first day of the week, the women did buy species and them when to the sepulcre.


Lets make fit this into a Wed theory:
Jesus died on Wed, and was put in the sepulcre on Wed, and the women were watching that Wed, and same Wed they preapered species and rested for the incoming sabbath.
Next day what is Thu is sabbath.
Next day is Fri, and a normal day in wich for no reasons the women didnt do anything at all.
Next day is Sat, wich is offcourse a sabbath.
Once the sabbath ended and the first day of the week comes (Sun) the women bought species and when to the sepulcre.


Now make it fit with the Thu theory.
Jesus died on Thu, and was put in the sepulcre on Thu, and the women were watching that Thu, and the same Thu they prepared species and rested for the incoming sabbath.
Next day what is Fri is sabbath.
Next day is Sat, wich is offcourse a sabbath.
Once the sabbath ended and the first day of the week comes (Sun) the women bought species and whent to the sepulcre.


In the Wed theory we have a full Fri in wich we dont understand why the women didnt go to the sepulcre. Also we dont understand the reference of Matthew for tow consecutives sabbaths.

In the Thu theory we have the two consecutive sabbaths that Matthew refers to.

For seen that sabbatrhs in plural check the original greek and leran about declinations and how greek form plurals. Sorry for KJV but the original greek is plural and there is not any doubt on that.

For the third time.... I have explained why the women didn't go to the sepulchre on Friday. It was guarded. Matthew calls it one Sabbath, not two.

 

[Goinheix]

Forum alert! Red Flags! There's only one Passover! but this person is saying that the Israelites celebrated Passover one way, and then later another way. There is NOTHING in Scripture that states that. And there is NOTHING in the scripture he gave to contradict what I said, and in fact, the scripture he gave SUPPORTS what I said, and not contradicts it. He's making a case that there is a different Passover because there was a lamb sacrificed every day, so Christ could "pick" the day. Well, the other feasts required an offering every day as well, but that does not nullify that there are in fact certain feast days special above other days, and days following it are part of the ceremony week, not to take the place of the feast days.

So, there is your answer. HE WOULD offer the lamb according to his own calendar date on a day other than the Lord commanded him rather than the 14th, so the death angel would do his job. No sense in debating the dead.

Additionally, I am not convinced he knows the Jewish calendar, nor what it represented, since my original point about the Exodus was not answered, but rather quoted over by something else as if to change what God has said, but in fact, that passage as I already stated does not contradict it.




Yes, you really don't get it, so you should be more humble and not take your interpretations and twist Scripture to fit your notions. It's sounding dumber and dumber by the minute. I don't even know why I am wasting my time debating this nonsense which is obviously and objectively in error.

I have reported your post. I will not tolerate that you instigate other brothers against me acusingme on false ground.

The Israelites did celebrated the pasover the way the did. I am not denayuinmg that.

The Moses law stablish passover the way it do. I am not denaying it

The jew at the time of Jesus did celebrate the passover as Moses indicates. I am Ok with that.

The passover as understood by Jesus and Moses is a week long fest with a lamb being sacrified every day.

If you dont like what Moses established is not upo to me.

The fact is that according to the Bible it was a lamb sacrifice each of the seven days.

For the third time.... I have explained why the women didn't go to the sepulchre on Friday. It was guarded. Matthew calls it one Sabbath, not two.

You did it twisting the Gospels acount and having it backward. That is not something a good christian do.

please give up. I have better thing to do and you have not a chance.

 

[FHII]

I have reported your post. I will not tolerate that you instigate other brothers against me acusingme on false ground.

The Israelites did celebrated the pasover the way the did. I am not denayuinmg that.

The Moses law stablish passover the way it do. I am not denaying it

The jew at the time of Jesus did celebrate the passover as Moses indicates. I am Ok with that.

The passover as understood by Jesus and Moses is a week long fest with a lamb being sacrified every day.

If you dont like what Moses established is not upo to me.

The fact is that according to the Bible it was a lamb sacrifice each of the seven days.




You did it twisting the Gospels acount and having it backward. That is not something a good christian do.

please give up. I have better thing to do and you have not a chance.

Goinheix,

Do the Gospels have less authority than Wikipedia, and is the Old Testament more inspired than the New Testament?

 

[Goinheix]

Goinheix,

Do the Gospels have less authority than Wikipedia, and is the Old Testament more inspired than the New Testament?

Not at all. It is some of the defenders of the Wed who claim that?

For all watching this thread, I have here an article stating the difficulty with the interpretation in the gospels right here:

http://en.wikipedia....uartodecimanism

It's not as clear cut as our friend here would have us believe. And keep one other thing in mind. The New Testament was not yet written when Jesus died. The writers were observing it as it happened, and the scripture they quoted and relied on was the Old Testament.

Do you see? This christian think than the NT lack of authority and inspiration making it lower than the OT. If we have any douobt concerning how reliable is the NT, he is quoting Wikipedia wich whit its authority and beiing more reliable contradic the Gospels.

It is him niot me

 

[tim_from_pa]

For the public record, I am not saying the New Testament is not inspired. On the contrary, it supports the Old Testament since both are the word of God. So, all I am saying is that when there's lack of clarity, one uses other Scripture to clarify it. I've heard people mince the way the 3 days and 3 nights were counted before, but never heard anyone make such adamant claims that Christ did not die on Passover, which was the sole intention of the feast and what it prophesied, otherwise it would have been pointless.

Several important calendar dates in the OT feast days were as follows: Nisan 10, Nisan 14, Nisan 15, "the morrow after the Sabbath" after Nisan 15, and then 7 weeks later on the "morrow after the seventh Sabbath", then in the autumn Tishri 1, Tishri10, Tishri 15, and Tishri 22, or the "eighth day" of the week long feast.

True, the Israelites offered sacrifices during those weeks, just as they offered them daily, monthly (e.g. new moon was a minor festival) and all throughout the year, but the does not give license to move the date of the feast anywhere one wants. If we want to look forward to what those days represent, then we look to the actual time of the feast. For example, the Spirit came exactly on Pentecost (the 50th day). So if Passover on the 14th represents Christ's death, what day would one expect that he died? That's right the 15th of Nisan :lol: But that's what is being stated here, and even a kid would find that humorous. He would not die on a day that foreshadowed his interment, and the people coming out of their sins represented by the Unleavened Bread which cannot be done UNTIL he dies first. Even the Jews hide part of their their Passover Bread as a game and Christians found that interesting that it represented Christ hid in the grave.

Now, I never got to the new Testament, but here's some NT scriptures that I believe very clearly said he died on Nisan 14 (aka preparation Day of the Passover): Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, John 19:31

Matthew identifies the day after the Crucifixion as the day after Preparation Day (Matt. 27:62), i.e. Nisan 15. So there is no contradiction in the gospels with the Exodus 12 passage at all.

My only mistake in this debate was that I quoted the Old Testament only instead of quoting crystal clear and indisputable NT passages. However, we have to understand that there is not new scripture. Everything in the Bible is already in the Old Testament, and in fact, I would venture to say even only in the book or Genesis. These books very clearly pointed to when Christ would come and die. This is how certain people, such as Simeon, and Anna, a prophetess knew the Christ child because they could tell the times. Thus Jesus could not come into the world and die "any old time he chose".

 

[Goinheix]

but never heard anyone make such adamant claims that Christ did not die on Passover, which was the sole intention of the feast and what it prophesied, otherwise it would have been pointless.

Jesus did dead in Passover. Paassovefr is a 7 days fest. Jesus died during the Passover fest.
The Gospels are clear in that Jesus did celebrates Passover in the 14, being already the night of the 15.

For the public record, I am not saying the New Testament is not inspired. On the contrary, it supports the Old Testament since both are the word of God. So, all I am saying is that when there's lack of clarity, one uses other Scripture to clarify it. I've heard people mince the way the 3 days and 3 nights were counted before, but never heard anyone make such adamant claims that Christ did not die on Passover, which was the sole intention of the feast and what it prophesied, otherwise it would have been pointless.

Several important calendar dates in the OT feast days were as follows: Nisan 10, Nisan 14, Nisan 15, "the morrow after the Sabbath" after Nisan 15, and then 7 weeks later on the "morrow after the seventh Sabbath", then in the autumn Tishri 1, Tishri10, Tishri 15, and Tishri 22, or the "eighth day" of the week long feast.

True, the Israelites offered sacrifices during those weeks, just as they offered them daily, monthly (e.g. new moon was a minor festival) and all throughout the year, but the does not give license to move the date of the feast anywhere one wants. If we want to look forward to what those days represent, then we look to the actual time of the feast. For example, the Spirit came exactly on Pentecost (the 50th day). So if Passover on the 14th represents Christ's death, what day would one expect that he died? That's right the 15th of Nisan :lol: But that's what is being stated here, and even a kid would find that humorous. He would not die on a day that foreshadowed his interment, and the people coming out of their sins represented by the Unleavened Bread which cannot be done UNTIL he dies first. Even the Jews hide part of their their Passover Bread as a game and Christians found that interesting that it represented Christ hid in the grave.

Now, I never got to the new Testament, but here's some NT scriptures that I believe very clearly said he died on Nisan 14 (aka preparation Day of the Passover): Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, John 19:31

Matthew identifies the day after the Crucifixion as the day after Preparation Day (Matt. 27:62), i.e. Nisan 15. So there is no contradiction in the gospels with the Exodus 12 passage at all.

My only mistake in this debate was that I quoted the Old Testament only instead of quoting crystal clear and indisputable NT passages. However, we have to understand that there is not new scripture. Everything in the Bible is already in the Old Testament, and in fact, I would venture to say even only in the book or Genesis. These books very clearly pointed to when Christ would come and die. This is how certain people, such as Simeon, and Anna, a prophetess knew the Christ child because they could tell the times. Thus Jesus could not come into the world and die "any old time he chose".

You are maling a big mess because you are proved wrong.

We can disscuss the week day and we can disscuss the month date.

The week day was already proved to be the Thu.

The month date have already be proved not to be the 14 or the 15.

Now we are disscussing if it was necesary for Christ to die on the 14. The prophesy and the OT states that the passover is a week long fest, being the 7 lambs different sacrificies of those off every day.

It have not been proven that it is necesary for christ to die the same day as in the first passover in egypt.

The Gospels are christal clear that Peter and John did prepare the passover the day the passover was supose to be prepared (14th); and that Christ did celebrates the Passover as it was supposed to be celebrated, the coming evening (15th). We can not denay the four Gospels, claim that they lack of aquracy or authority. Jesus, despite what we read in Exodus, did not die in the 14th.

 

[tim_from_pa]

Jesus did dead in Passover. Paassovefr is a 7 days fest. Jesus died during the Passover fest.
The Gospels are clear in that Jesus did celebrates Passover in the 14, being already the night of the 15.

And the same gospels also say this:

John 19:14
(NIV)
14 It was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about noon.
“Here is your king,” Pilate said to the Jews.

John 19:31
(NIV)
Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jewish leaders did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down.

Straight from the Word of the Lord. Ask any Jew what the day of preparation is, the day Jesus was crucified and they'll say the Day of preparation is Nisan 14. The High Holy Day, the Sabbath is Nisan 15, the next day, i.e what John said (not me) . Don't blame me for twisting God's Word. John wrote that the crucifixion was on the day of Preparation, I did not say it. I'm only quoting John. Anyone want to mess with the Word of the Lord and say otherwise?

Sigh.... I don't know how else to say it or make it any clearer. There's only so many ways to float a boat.

 

[Goinheix]

And the same gospels also say this:

John 19:14
(NIV)
14 It was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about noon.
“Here is your king,” Pilate said to the Jews.

John 19:31
(NIV)
Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jewish leaders did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down.

Straight from the Word of the Lord. Ask any Jew what the day of preparation is, the day Jesus was crucified and they'll say the Day of preparation is Nisan 14. The High Holy Day, the Sabbath is Nisan 15, the next day, i.e what John said (not me) . Don't blame me for twisting God's Word. John wrote that the crucifixion was on the day of Preparation, I did not say it. I'm only quoting John. Anyone want to mess with the Word of the Lord and say otherwise?

Sigh.... I don't know how else to say it or make it any clearer. There's only so many ways to float a boat.

Thank for helping to make my point.
On the Moses description of the Passover there is two High Sabbatns and offcourse there is two Preparation Days. One prperation day just before each sabbath. The first sabbth is the first day of the fest, and the other sabbath is the las day of the fest. If Jesus was not crucified the preparation day of the firt sabbath; then he was crucified the preparation day of the second sabbth, the last day of Passover.

The disciples - peter and John - did prepare the passover in the preparation day (14) and Jesus did celebrated passover that night (15). He was arrexted and send for trial for almos a week. I am ready to show to all of you each of those day clearly in the Gospels. In fact, if Jesus was before pilates by noon...how could him be crucified by 9am? Because he was crucified not same day but next day (of being at pilates). And there is signs of many more days.

 

[tomwebster]

Goinheix,

I don't think it would be possible for anyone to be farther from the truth as you are. There was one Passover each year. The feast lasted 7 days, but only one Passover lamb. God didn't need seven lambs, His Only Son was plenty sufficient. It's an abomination to even suggest He needed to offer a sacrifice seven times.

 

[Goinheix]

Goinheix,

I don't think it would be possible for anyone to be farther from the truth as you are. There was one Passover each year. The feast lasted 7 days, but only one Passover lamb. God didn't need seven lambs, His Only Son was plenty sufficient. It's an abomination to even suggest He needed to offer a sacrifice seven times.

I am not at all the father of the truth and certaily is not you neither and not any one defending a Wednesday crucifixion. The truth is not something we can not reach, the truth is right there is the Bible. The Bible is clearly saying that Jesus did not die on a Wednesday; and that shall be enouogh to cole this discussion. Unless you are the father of the trith and denasy the truth in the Bible.
Offcourse that it was not necesary for God to have seven lambs. That is a very stupid idea and you are the first man that i ear saying it. God needed one single lamb to die one single time in one single day. Wich day it was? According tot the Bible - the sourse of the truth - that day was one of the seven days. Not to die all of the seven days, but anyone of the seven days.

I am not the father of the truth but i have found it. Jesus did die a Thursday as clearly said in the four Gospels. From now on I wiill thow away all perls (Wed and Fri) and keep the more precious perl of the only biblical trith: Jesus was crucified on Thursday.

 

[tomwebster]

I am not at all the father of the truth and certaily is not you neither and not any one defending a Wednesday crucifixion. The truth is not something we can not reach, the truth is right there is the Bible. The Bible is clearly saying that Jesus did not die on a Wednesday; and that shall be enouogh to cole this discussion. Unless you are the father of the trith and denasy the truth in the Bible.
Offcourse that it was not necesary for God to have seven lambs. That is a very stupid idea and you are the first man that i ear saying it. God needed one single lamb to die one single time in one single day. Wich day it was? According tot the Bible - the sourse of the truth - that day was one of the seven days. Not to die all of the seven days, but anyone of the seven days.

I am not the father of the truth but i have found it. Jesus did die a Thursday as clearly said in the four Gospels. From now on I wiill thow away all perls (Wed and Fri) and keep the more precious perl of the only biblical trith: Jesus was crucified on Thursday.

You need to start studying Scripture, gh. Yeshua Hamashiach (Jesus Christ) fulfilled all of God's feast days including Passover. Study the Passover in Exodus. There was only one day on which the Passover lamb could be sacrificed and that day was the preparation day, the day before Passover. You do know that Passover is the High Sabbath, which is why Christ had to be off the cross and buried before sundown, the start of Passover.

PS: I did not say you were the "father" of truth. I said you couldn't be farther from the truth.

 

[FHII]

For the public record, I am not saying the New Testament is not inspired. On the contrary, it supports the Old Testament since both are the word of God. So, all I am saying is that when there's lack of clarity, one uses other Scripture to clarify it. I've heard people mince the way the 3 days and 3 nights were counted before, but never heard anyone make such adamant claims that Christ did not die on Passover, which was the sole intention of the feast and what it prophesied, otherwise it would have been pointless.

Several important calendar dates in the OT feast days were as follows: Nisan 10, Nisan 14, Nisan 15, "the morrow after the Sabbath" after Nisan 15, and then 7 weeks later on the "morrow after the seventh Sabbath", then in the autumn Tishri 1, Tishri10, Tishri 15, and Tishri 22, or the "eighth day" of the week long feast.

True, the Israelites offered sacrifices during those weeks, just as they offered them daily, monthly (e.g. new moon was a minor festival) and all throughout the year, but the does not give license to move the date of the feast anywhere one wants. If we want to look forward to what those days represent, then we look to the actual time of the feast. For example, the Spirit came exactly on Pentecost (the 50th day). So if Passover on the 14th represents Christ's death, what day would one expect that he died? That's right the 15th of Nisan :lol: But that's what is being stated here, and even a kid would find that humorous. He would not die on a day that foreshadowed his interment, and the people coming out of their sins represented by the Unleavened Bread which cannot be done UNTIL he dies first. Even the Jews hide part of their their Passover Bread as a game and Christians found that interesting that it represented Christ hid in the grave.

Now, I never got to the new Testament, but here's some NT scriptures that I believe very clearly said he died on Nisan 14 (aka preparation Day of the Passover): Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, John 19:31

Matthew identifies the day after the Crucifixion as the day after Preparation Day (Matt. 27:62), i.e. Nisan 15. So there is no contradiction in the gospels with the Exodus 12 passage at all.

My only mistake in this debate was that I quoted the Old Testament only instead of quoting crystal clear and indisputable NT passages. However, we have to understand that there is not new scripture. Everything in the Bible is already in the Old Testament, and in fact, I would venture to say even only in the book or Genesis. These books very clearly pointed to when Christ would come and die. This is how certain people, such as Simeon, and Anna, a prophetess knew the Christ child because they could tell the times. Thus Jesus could not come into the world and die "any old time he chose".

Tim from PA,

Please bear with me in these questions. I am only trying to be fair to Goinheix in asking you them. Do you believe wikipedia has more authority than the New Testament? Also, do you believe the Old Testament is more inspired than the New Testament? I understand that you believe the New Testament is inspired, as you have said so. But is the Old Testament more inspired?

Thanks

 

[tim_from_pa]

To everyone here. Although I had some sharp words with Goinheix, the issue I am discussing with him is not so much the day of the week as it is the Jewish calendar. Frankly, although I don't agree with a Thursday crucifixion (because it is not a full 3 days and 3 nights until Sunday), I will admit that Sunday is at least "the third day" if we count it as only a partial day. I would go with a Thursday crucifixion a thousand times sooner than a Friday, and although I believe in a Wednesday crucifixion, I am far more tolerant of those who believe in a Thursday crucifixion than a Friday and respect them.

The issue I have here is that I believe both old and New Testament very clearly say that Jesus was crucified, at the same time a paschal lambs were sacrificed, on the 14th of Nisan late in the day.

The fact that Jesus had what is commonly called "the last supper" on the 14th of Nisan as Goinheix believes is from what I believe is EARLY on the 14th of Nisan, i.e. at the start. But Jesus was crucified later in the day which on the Jewish calendar is the SAME day.

So, actually I agree with Goinheix that Jesus had the "last supper" on the 14th as the gospels state, but it was EARLY as opposed to LATE in the day. IN other words, the evening of Nisan 13th-14th but since it was evening could still be called the 14th of Nisan and the "Preparation of the Passover" but yet as John clearly states also the "Preparation of the Passover" for the crucifixion. This is how the scriptures appear to "contradict" and yet are true reporting the same day.

The whole problem, as I often claim, is what I call the "Gentilization of the Hebrew calendar". We Gentile believers do not understand what the Jews believed, and certainly have an alien calendar compared to theirs. This bring misunderstandings such as what we are all having here. I tend to be a little emotional because I am into astronomy, calendars, mathematics and I am also a gnomonist. So, I understand calendars and time very well --- both theirs and ours. I can remember a person's birthday better than their name years later I understand time so well, but that's another subject.

Even though Goinheix reported an earlier post (which was really a crazy form of humor of mine regarding red flags), I harbor no ill feelings and actually admire his persistence, even if I don't agree. I wish more people had this same passion for Christ that he has.

With all that, I made my case whether one agrees or not with me. I'll let others speak now.

Tim from PA,

Please bear with me in these questions. I am only trying to be fair to Goinheix in asking you them. Do you believe wikipedia has more authority than the New Testament? Also, do you believe the Old Testament is more inspired than the New Testament? I understand that you believe the New Testament is inspired, as you have said so. But is the Old Testament more inspired?

Thanks

NO my friend, the OT is not more inspired, but it is inspired and therefore the NT has to agree.

What I was trying to convey was that the OT ALREADY prophesied what was being reported in the NT. God had His plan of redemption "from the foundation of the world" and thus scripture is scripture. There is "nothing new" in the new testament, but rather it is the manifestation of the OT's "shadows of things to come" as Paul stated. God already had it planned out. The New Testament is not some after-thought.

My point in the Wikipedia article was to show that famous theologians were not clear on what the NT was trying to teach. However, the NT has to agree with the OT, right? So to clarify the confusion, one can read the OT and it gives the answer to what the NT is trying to say. That was my whole point.

 

[FHII]

My point in the Wikipedia article was to show that famous theologians were not clear on what the NT was trying to teach. However, the NT has to agree with the OT, right? So to clarify the confusion, one can read the OT and it gives the answer to what the NT is trying to say. That was my whole point.

Ok. Bear with me one more time and answer clearly.... I understand what you said and I can get a clear answer from it, but I would like a yes or no answer.... I have my reasons, please bear with me. Yes or no... In plain terms that Goinheix can understand. Does Wikipedia hold more authority than the New Testament?

 

[Goinheix]

You need to start studying Scripture, gh. Yeshua Hamashiach (Jesus Christ) fulfilled all of God's feast days including Passover. Study the Passover in Exodus. There was only one day on which the Passover lamb could be sacrificed and that day was the preparation day, the day before Passover. You do know that Passover is the High Sabbath, which is why Christ had to be off the cross and buried before sundown, the start of Passover.

PS: I did not say you were the "father" of truth. I said you couldn't be farther from the truth.

Yeashua hamashiach????????? It seem that you have a Jew backgroud. Then I tell you that if you are also a Christian it will be necesary for you to accept the New testament and Gospels as inspired scripture. The Gospels say that when the day of praparation arrived (that is the 14th) Jesus told Peter and John to prepare the Passover. For if it is any doubt or confusion, the Gospels add that it was the day in wich the lamb is sacrified.(14). According to the Gospels, Jesus was perfectly alive the 14, and did celebrate the Passover as the evening (15) comes. That is writen in the Gospels without any confusion or doubt.

You claim that the Gospels are wrong and that Jesus Christ did died the 14th as it happens in Exodus at Egypt. According to you, Exodus is correct and the Gospels are wrong. Actually the only thing that is wrong is saying that it was necesary for Jesus to die the 14th.

The issue I have here is that I believe both old and New Testament very clearly say that Jesus was crucified, at the same time a paschal lambs were sacrificed, on the 14th of Nisan late in the day.

Now In understand that you are a sincere christian loving the truth. It is clear that we disagree on the day of the week, and it is unnecesary to go again and again over all the argumentations. Both argumentations are there to be read as many times are needed. I only one to correct a clear and huge mistake: the New Testament do not say that Jesus was crucified at the same time (date) a paschal lambs were sacrificed on the 14th of Nisan late in the day.

I can refute all you are saying, but this one is very basic.