A scripturally accurate view of the events celebrated in the Easter season

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I didn't come to believe in the Lord as my hope for salvation from out of any “traditional” church. As a matter of fact, my background was that of a, very militant against Christianity, agnostic. I had spent a lot of my time debunking the veracity of the scriptures.

Some of the most fertile ground for arguments put forth by agnostics and atheists against the dependability of the scriptures is found in the gospel accounts concerning the events of “Passion Week”.

More than one critic has said that the accounts of that time period as presented in the various gospels are so rife with contradictions that they should cause any Bible believer to reexamine his faith in Jesus Christ as their savor. I found that to be true and I exploited it to the best of my “evil” ability as a skeptic. I found, as have most critical skeptics, that few if any Christians were prepared to defend their traditional belief concerning the events of Easter or even the dependability of the scriptures in general.

After my rather radical conversion to a belief in the Lord as my savor – I determined not to be among the many Christians who simply winked at the contradictions and inaccuracies of tradition when compared to the scriptures. I determined (with a rather “Berean” attitude IMO) to either get these things straight to the best of my ability or not to teach that the scriptures were an infallible guide for our life and faith.

I have been a very active teacher of the Word of God now for many decades (I’m over 70 now). I have always endeavored to teach about the events of Easter accurately whenever they came to be discussed – usually in the Easter season.. It seems that it is more likely the younger believers in God’s Word who have the most difficulty with the traditions of Easter. The longer one has been active in the practice of “traditions” it seems the more difficult it is to get them to question their traditions.

This is not often the case with children and young people in general. It doesn’t give them much pause at all to question authority. Rather – they seem to relish it. I made the mistake of saying in a previous thread that even a child could see that Christ wasn’t crucified on Friday. Apparently that was a little too strong of a statement and I took some heat for it. Nevertheless – after teaching Bible to both children and adults for a great many decades now – I find that it is the children who question the error of the Friday crucifixion almost every Easter time.

I make it a point not to bring these controversies up at Easter time unless appropriate to do so. But when it does come up(or when I’m involved in a forum like this) I am not reluctant at all to do so.

I go to church myself at Easter and participate in many of the various traditions (including Good Friday celebrations) usually without complaint. But in my own life and the life of my family we know and teach the differences between what the scriptures teach and the various errors of tradition.

But I have been a teaching elder in the church for a long time now and many people have come to celebrate traditions with a more skeptical eye toward tradition as do I.

A great many churches around the world have corrected these errors of tradition as well. Most of them (understandably) are of the Bible believing, evangelical, Protestant variety.

Understandably it is the believers who have vested a lot in the authority of the leaders of their churches who have resisted correction concerning their traditions. That is often the rather “liturgical” minded churches.

Well – with that background out of the way – I will list just a few of the areas where traditions have strayed away from scriptural accuracy.

The first step in seeing them is usually to question the so called “Good Friday” crucifixion. I have found that it is here where most people who want to believe the scriptures have a question. Sad to say - their questions are not often addressed properly. As a result of this inability of their teachers to address the problem properly they just forget all about it and go on to be persons who simply ignore the supposed “errors” found in the gospel accounts.

I suppose it depends on the individual exactly how that effects their faith in the Word of God over the years. But I suspect that it is at least a subconscious reason for the lack of faith we often encounter when it comes to standing on the Word of God.

Some ways that a “scripture based” tradition celebration of the events of Easter vary from many other traditions follow.

Christ was resurrected on “Saturday” evening and not on Sunday morning.

Good Friday is really Good Wednesday.

Palm Sunday is really Palm Saturday.

The Last Supper eaten by Christ and His disciples was not the “Passover” meal where the Passover lamb was eaten.

The day after the crucifixion was not the Saturday Sabbath- but the Passover Sabbath – one of 7 “high” Sabbaths celebrated by the Jews.

The rather obvious, so called, errors in the gospel accounts concerning the buying and the preparation of the spices for the anointing on Sunday morning are not errors at all – simply to be winked at and ignored as believers whistle through the grave yard of the apparent “contradictions “ in the gospels accounts.

The events of Easter Week are in reality a very concise and detailed fulfillment of the type of the Passover and the Exodus with the crossing of the Red Sea and the open show of Pharaoh etc. as found in Exodus 12-14; Leviticus 23 and such.

This prophecy – in particular when combined with the ones concerning the suffering Messiah as found in the Book of Daniel and the Book of Isaiah – is the most fantastic prophecy imaginable. Unfortunately it’s significance is usually missed because of a less then scripture based celebration of various traditions by the church.

It's difficult to keep an OP like this short. But I tried.

There’s a lot more detailed discussion to be had concerning Easter tradition errors of course - but I don’t know how willing people here are to work through these things.
 
Last edited:

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
When does a day begin according to the Scriptures?
The simple answer is that it began at dusk. But the simple answer doesn't clear things up for most people.

It's always a little awkward to speak of days and nights with regard to both the way we see these things and the way the Jews saw things.

The passages in Genesis which refer to the "evening and the morning" being a day etc. are the basis for the way that the Jews saw and dated days and dates.

We (I'm assuming that includes most here) change days and dates from the hour we call "midnight". Thus we would technically see evening or twilight (what the Jews and the commandment concerning the slaying of the Passover lamb, for instance, refer to as "between the two evenings" - as the commandment was given to them) as being Saturday.

The Jews didn't, of course, call their days "Friday", "Saturday", "Sunday" and such. But if they did they would have said that Christ was resurrected between the two evenings of Saturday and Sunday. That would be exactly 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth in fulfillment of the sign of Jonah which Christ said would be the only sign proving His claim to be the promised messiah.

We on the other hand (for the purposes of discussing the timing of the resurrection) simply say that Christ was resurrected on Saturday evening according to Christ's Words which indicated that He would be "exactly" 72 hours in the tomb.

The important thing for us is to see that Christ was not resurrected at "sunrise" on Sunday morning. Any celebration of a sunrise service should be predicated on the discovery by the disciples of the fact that the stone had been rolled away and that Christ had already risen from the dead and not on the actual resurrection itself.

Also a celebration of Christ's ascension to the Father at daybreak on Sunday would be perfectly appropriate - since, as He told Mary, He was going to do that at that time and didn't want to be held onto by her.

But the resurrection itself should not (scripturally) be celebrated at daybreak on Sunday.

An "Easter" service on Sunday morning would of course be a very appropriate special day for us to celebrate the resurrection and ascension in general.

We could have a special time on the evening before Easter day where we celebrated the exact time of the resurrection - sort of like what we do (erroneously IMO) with so called "Good Friday"). But I know of no Christian group who does that.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I'll wait for those with a dog in the fight to weigh in. For now, I hope Mr. Knox has read our statement of purpose and rules.
Of course I have.

Do you feel that I have done something against the rules?
 
Upvote 0

Cappadocious

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2012
3,885
860
✟30,661.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Of course I have.

Do you feel that I have done something against the rules?
No, and I don't really respect cf rules, anyway. Just that this is the traditional theology forum, and your post uses traditional vs. Bible-believer etc. as a sort of abusive contrast.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I would like to ask if the OP agrees that the Scriptures are written utilising a variety of schemes and tropes, that is, figures of speech?
Yes I do and they must be considered when looking at doctrines.

But that doesn't apply when looking at the one clear sign that Jesus gave us to prove that He was the Messiah - namely that He would be exactly 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb. The scriptures are pretty clear in their teaching this as being something to take quite literally.


"for just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matthew 12:40

MATTHEW 16:21
21 From that time forth began Jesus to show to his disciples, how that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day (Greek: τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ).

MATTHEW 17:22-23
22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said to them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men.
23 And they shall kill him, and the third day (Greek: τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ) he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.

MATTHEW 20:18-19
18 Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,
19 And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day (Greek: τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ) he shall rise again.

MARK 9:31
31For he taught his disciples, and said to 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 (Greek: τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ).

MARK 10:32-34
32 And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen to him,
33 Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered to the chief priests, and to the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles:
34 And they shall mock him, and scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.

LUKE 9:21-22
21 And he strictly warned them, and commanded them to tell no man that thing;
22 Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.

LUKE 18:31-33
31 And he took to him the twelve, and said to them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all thing that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished.
32 For he shall be delivered to the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spat on:
33 And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day (Greek: τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ) he shall rise again.

LUKE 24:6-7
6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spoke to you while he was yet in Galilee,
7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

LUKE 24:46
46 And said to them, Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day

ACTS 10:39-40
39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
40 Him God raised up the third day, and showed him openly;

Acts 17:23 "and they will kill Him, and He will be raised on the third day.” And they were deeply grieved."

1 CORINTHIANS 15:3-4
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
No, and I don't really respect cf rules, anyway. Just that this is the traditional theology forum, and your post uses traditional vs. Bible-believer etc. as a sort of abusive contrast.
For myself - I do respect the rules. That is why I went over my position with the moderators before posting here.

I know nothing about why any particular person would consider scripture supported truth as being abusive in any way.

If any other position is scripture based it should be presented as a counter point to my position.

If it is more scriptural (or at least as scriptural) then it will be considered to also be a position that is "Bible believing".

The entire point is to determine what the scriptures say and bring our beliefs into line with what the scriptures teach.

When I referred to myself as "Bible believing" - I was speaking for myself. That means that I always endeavor to bring my beliefs into line with what the scriptures teach and act (teach) accordingly.

Whether or not any other person comes under the same banner is completely up to them and God's Word to decide.

IMO one should examine every one of their traditions in light of the scriptures - our only guide to truth and practice.

Obviously some within Christendom have placed tradition on an equal footing with scripture. That's between the Lord and them - of course.

Speaking for myself - I'm not of that particular flavor.

I would like to suggest here that we stick to presenting the arguments from scripture and not spend our time claiming that someone is abusing someone else simply because they claim to be a "Bible believer".

You can claim the same thing for your position of course. I won't be offended in the slightest.

After you have presented your scriptural data, however, people can make up their own mind as to whose position is "Bible believing" and who's is not.

That's the whole point of having this discussion concerning the traditions practiced at Easter time in the first place - isn't it?

By the way I did not say that anyone here was not "Bible believing". I merely said that most of the churches around the world who hold to and practice a literal fulfillment of scripture regarding the events surrounding Passion Week are of the "Bible believing, evangelical, Protestant" type.

Please don't be offended by that fact. That's just the way it is.

I'd really like to stick to the scriptural facts after this - now that we've got this out of the way.

OK?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,429
11,980
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,676.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Yes I do and they must be considered when looking at doctrines.

But that doesn't apply when looking at the one clear sign that Jesus gave us to prove that He was the Messiah - namely that He would be exactly 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb. The scriptures are pretty clear in their teaching this as being something to take quite literally.


"for just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matthew 12:40

MATTHEW 16:21
21 From that time forth began Jesus to show to his disciples, how that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day (Greek: τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ).

MATTHEW 17:22-23
22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said to them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men.
23 And they shall kill him, and the third day (Greek: τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ) he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.

MATTHEW 20:18-19
18 Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,
19 And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day (Greek: τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ) he shall rise again.

MARK 9:31
31For he taught his disciples, and said to 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 (Greek: τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ).

MARK 10:32-34
32 And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen to him,
33 Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered to the chief priests, and to the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles:
34 And they shall mock him, and scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.

LUKE 9:21-22
21 And he strictly warned them, and commanded them to tell no man that thing;
22 Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.

LUKE 18:31-33
31 And he took to him the twelve, and said to them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all thing that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished.
32 For he shall be delivered to the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spat on:
33 And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day (Greek: τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ) he shall rise again.

LUKE 24:6-7
6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spoke to you while he was yet in Galilee,
7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

LUKE 24:46
46 And said to them, Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day

ACTS 10:39-40
39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
40 Him God raised up the third day, and showed him openly;

Acts 17:23 "and they will kill Him, and He will be raised on the third day.” And they were deeply grieved."

1 CORINTHIANS 15:3-4
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
The problem you have with taking Matt 12:40 as exactly 72 hours is that it makes every other one of the verses you quoted incorrect, for if Christ was 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth then he will not have risen till the fourth day. If however we understand "3 days and 3 nights" to be a figure of speech, synecdoche to be precise, then there is no clash with the other verses you quoted.
It is, in fact, all those other verses which make it plain that "3 days and 3 nights" is a figure of speech.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Shane R

Priest
Supporter
Jan 18, 2012
2,276
1,097
Southeast Ohio
✟536,041.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
Here is a piece I wrote long ago when I was a fundamentalist:

The day of the crucifixion of Jesus is a controversial subject among many scholars. Traditionally, Friday has been suggested as the day of crucifixion. Some have questioned the view and developed a 'reconstructed view', suggesting Wednesday or Thursday as the day of crucifixion. Biblical evidence allows the student to reconstruct the order of events leading to the crucifixion and reach an accurate conclusion as to what day of the week it occurred.

Several pieces of information must be gathered to begin the reconstruction. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John record that Jesus ate the passover, so the date of passover must be researched. Then, the inspired authors propose a sabbath following the death of Jesus, so this sabbath must be correlated with the passover. Also, many scholars find it important to see how the day of passover effects the day of the 'triumphal entry' into Jerusalem.

Exodus 12:6-8 records:
And ye shall keep [the passover lamb] until the fourteenth day of the same month; and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at even. And they shall take of the blood, and put it on the two side-posts and on the lintel, upon the houses wherein they shall eat it. And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread; with bitter herbs they shall eat it.​
Leviticus 23:5, Numbers 28:16, and Ezekiel 45:21 further support the fourteenth day of the first month, Abib, as the appointed day for passover. Numbers 9:5, Joshua 5:10, and 2 Chronicles 35:1, 17 record examples of the feast being eaten on the fourteenth day. Leviticus 23:6 and Numbers 28:17-18 record that the feast of unleavened bread, a seven day observance, was held on the fifteenth day of the first month. This feast of unleavened bread is sometimes identified as the passover in the scriptures, since the two ran consecutively.

The term 'sabbath' is used in some Bible versions to describe occasions other than the weekly seventh day rest (see Leviticus 23:32). The sabbath following Jesus' crucifixion is called a 'high day' in John 19:31; coupling this expression with the sometime use of sabbath to denote a day other than the seventh leads reconstructed view scholars to suggest that Jesus was crucified the day before passover (13th or 14th of Abib). Coffman, in his Mark commentary, mis-identifies the passover as 15th of Abib, a common error of reconstructed view scholars.

Matthew 26:17-20, Mark 14:12-18, and Luke 22:7-15 all propose that Jesus ate the 14th of Abib passover meal with his disciples. Some confusion may be caused by the account given in John 18-19, which repeatedly refers to the day of the crucifixion as the day of preparation for the passover. When it is remembered that the feast of unleavened bread ran consecutively and that it was sometimes also identified as passover John's usage is explained. If Jesus was crucified on Friday, 15th of Abib, the regular sabbath of that Saturday could well be called a 'high day' because it fell within the seven days of unleavened bread.

What of the 'triumphal entry'? Reconstructed view scholars propose that a Friday crucifixion causes Jesus' entry into Jerusalem to fall on the sabbath of the previous week. John 12:1 records, “Jesus therefore six days before the passover came to Bethany.” In Bethany he feasted with Lazarus, Mary, Martha, and many others. John 12:12 states that Jesus departed for Jerusalem “on the morrow” after the feast. An assumption is here uncovered: it is assumed that the feast was held the day of Jesus' arrival in Bethany. However, this is not stated in the text. If the feast was held on the 10th of Abib, Sunday by traditional reckoning, no Sabbath laws were violated. This is not an unreasonable hypothesis since John 12:12 states that a great multitude had come to the feast; by placing the feast at a later date than Jesus' arrival, time is allowed for the women to prepare and for news of the event to be spread. Now, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem is the 11th of Abib, a Monday in this case. Matthew 26:2 occurs after Jesus arrived in Jerusalem and states that the passover would be in two days; this would well fit Tuesday the 12th of Abib.

Lastly, Matthew 28:1-10, Mark 16:2-6, Luke 24:1-7, and John 20 all record that the resurrection occurred on the 'first day'. As the sabbath is the seventh day, and Sunday is the first day, Jesus rose on Sunday. The term 'first day' is non-sensical if most reconstructed views are accepted. Reconstructed view scholars raise an objection, saying that Friday to Sunday is not three days and three nights, thus not fulfilling Jesus' words recorded in Matthew 12:40, “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the fish; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” and Paul's summary in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. What the scholars really mean is that by being buried Friday evening and resurrected Sunday morning Jesus was not in the tomb for three full days and nights - which is true - but the text does not specify three full days and nights nor does the type of Jonah (Jonah 1:17).

Scholars proposing a reconstructed view of Jesus' crucifixion cannot support their view and maintain consistency with the holy scriptures. In fact, they cannot agree amongst themselves whether the reconstruction places the crucifixion on Wednesday or Thursday. They make a variety of sloppy mistakes with their chronologies. Ultimately, their theories question the accuracy of the holy scriptures.

Chronology:
Abib, 33 A.D.​

8th Friday Jesus arrives in Bethany 6 days before passover
9th Saturday/sabbath
10th Sunday feast in Bethany
11th Monday entry into Jerusalem
12th Tuesday
13th Wednesday
14th Thursday passover
15th Friday crucifixion and burial
16th Saturday 'high' sabbath
17th Sunday resurrection​
All that said, the traditional chronology which advocates Palm Sunday is not incompatible with the Biblical text, only less probable due to Jewish custom. However, we see Jesus mostly unconcerned with Jewish custom repeatedly, so I have come to accept the usual timeline of Holy Week. What I think is more controversial than the DAY of crucifixion is the YEAR of crucifixion.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The problem you have with taking Matt 12:40 as exactly 72 hours is that it makes every other one of the verses you quoted incorrect, for if Christ was 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth then he will not have risen till the fourth day. If however we understand "3 days and 3 nights" to be a figure of speech, synecdoche to be precise, then there is no clash with the other verses you quoted.
It is, in fact, all those other verses which make it plain that "3 days and 3 nights" is a figure of speech.
Not so.

If the Lord was buried at exactly the change of days (call it 6 P.M. for our purposes) and raised at exactly 6 P.M. – a correlation of the various statements in the gospels would result in an exact 72 hrs. in the heart of the earth. That is in perfect accord with the statement in Matthew which you referenced.

What we would call 6 P.M. exactly on Wednesday evening (for sake of our discussion) until exactly 6 P.M. on Saturday evening is the time period we are talking about here.

“Jesus answered, “Are there not twelve hours in the day?......” John 11:9

That result is 3 days exactly: Thursday (12 hrs.), Friday (12 hrs.), and Saturday (12 hrs.) AND 3 nights: Wednesday (12 hrs.), Thursday (12 hrs.) and Friday (12 hrs.). That’s exactly as He prophesied it would be - “on the 3rd day”, “in 3 days”, and “after 3 days”.

These statements leave nothing to interpretation. It was exactly 72 hrs.

If we only had this scriptural data to work with, I suppose we could still say that it is up in the air a bit. But this is hardly the only data we have to work with.

We must correlate these statements with the Word’s teaching that there was a regular day between two distinct Sabbaths on which the disciples purchased and prepare the spices for the intended anointing of the body of Jesus. (See Mark 16:1-2 and Luke 23:54-56)

We have to equation in the fact that the women came to the tomb before sunrise and the stone had already been rolled away and the Lord resurrected.

We must correlate into the doctrine the fact that the next day after the crucifixion was a “high” Sabbath and not the regular Saturday Sabbath.

We must also coordinate into the equation the fact that He spent the 6th day before the Passover Sabbath (the 15th of Nissan or Abib) in Bethany and entered Jerusalem the next day – the 10th of Nissan (or Abib) as the Passover Lamb of Israel.

We also have to take into account the clear teaching that Jesus is “our Passover Lamb”.

We have to look at the last supper and it’s relationship to the Passover.

We have to look at the entire picture concerning the Passover prophecy and the Exodus 12, 13, and 14 along with the very strict admonition in Leviticus 23 as to how the Passover remembrances were conducted for the next 1500 or so years.

And many other such things - not the least of which is the 3 days and 3 nights on the Egyptian side of the Red Sea and the open show of the enemy of Israel at the crossing of the Red Sea.

It is the rather shallow looking at the fact that the next day was a Sabbath (and the ignoring of the other data) that led to the mistaken doctrine of so called “Good Friday” in the first place. There are so many convergent parts that must be coordinated that, after they have all been brought to play on the doctrine, there can be no doubt that it was Wednesday evening when He died and was buried.

Sure – it’s very easy to go along with the tradition of the Friday crucifixion and not study the scriptures for ourselves. But that is not the way God would have us to behave in the Kingdom of God IMO.

For the average parishioner perhaps it’s no big deal. But for those who would be teachers of the Word of God there is a lot more at stake.

“Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.” James 3:1

There really is only one reason to reject the scriptural picture of these events IMO. That is that one holds the traditions of the church in higher regard than the teachings of scripture.
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,429
11,980
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,676.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Not so.

If the Lord was buried at exactly the change of days (call it 6 P.M. for our purposes) and raised at exactly 6 P.M. – a correlation of the various statements in the gospels would result in an exact 72 hrs. in the heart of the earth. That is in perfect accord with the statement in Matthew which you referenced.
Unfortunately for you there was no way that could have happened. The gospels are all clear that the next day was the Sabbath, on which day no work could be done, so Jesus body had to be placed in the tomb AND the large stone rolled across the entrance, all before sundown.

Sorry.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Unfortunately for you there was no way that could have happened. The gospels are all clear that the next day was the Sabbath, on which day no work could be done, so Jesus body had to be placed in the tomb AND the large stone rolled across the entrance, all before sundown. Sorry.
Or exactly at sundown.

Beside that - it wouldn't be the first "work" done on the Sabbath either by the Lord of the Sabbath or His disciples now would it?

No need to be sorry. :) As I have said - this is hardly the end of the discussion. It is just the beginning and the easiest place for most people to start.

Many or even most new believers question the Friday crucifixion fairly early on in their struggles with faith in the veracity of the scriptures.

Of all the scenarios put forth by scholars, a Friday crucifixion is probably the least desirable.

I do understand however that to depart from a tradition held by those around them is very difficult for people to do.

Two things we do know are that a Friday crucifixion cannot be reconciled with what the scriptures teach and the teaching of a Friday crucifixion is at odds with the Nicene Creed subscribed to by this forum.

Of course - as with most doctrines - if a person wants to believe and teach that various statements in scripture are just "figures of speech" (when ever and where ever it suits him) then all bets are off, as it were, in any kind of systematic pursuit of doctrine.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
.................. Scholars proposing a reconstructed view of Jesus' crucifixion cannot support their view and maintain consistency with the holy scriptures. In fact, they cannot agree amongst themselves whether the reconstruction places the crucifixion on Wednesday or Thursday. They make a variety of sloppy mistakes with their chronologies. Ultimately, their theories question the accuracy of the holy scriptures. These theories are yet another example of the idle questioning and learning without coming to know the truth which Paul warned Timothy about by epistle.
I can't agree that trying to come to a chronology concerning these events which eliminates as best we can what appears to be numerous errors in the scriptures is "idle questioning and learning without coming to know the truth". Quite the contrary in fact.

I have read most of the "reconstructed" views concerning these events and I am in agreement that they are often as much in conflict with what the scriptures teach as the Friday crucifixion scenario is.

I am not interested in "agreeing amongst" any other particular author about these things. I am interested in finding the truth of the matter.

When I first did this study, some half a century ago or so, there was precious little in the way of "reconstructed" view fo consult. That has changed now of course with the advent of the internet. Unfortunately there is misinformation "amongst" all of the online sources - probably more now than ever before.
Chronology:
Abib, 33 A.D.​

8th Friday Jesus arrives in Bethany 6 days before passover
9th Saturday/sabbath
10th Sunday feast in Bethany
11th Monday entry into Jerusalem
12th Tuesday
13th Wednesday
14th Thursday passover
15th Friday crucifixion and burial
16th Saturday 'high' sabbath
17th Sunday resurrection​
The proper chronology follows:

The 9th of Nissan (or Abib) - Friday: Jesus supped with His friends in Bethany, 6 days before the Passover.

The 10th - Saturday the Sabbath: Jesus entered Jerusalem as the lamb of God, looked around the temple and departed without a scene since no commerce was being performed it being a Sabbath day. This was the fulfillment of the picture of the selection of the lamb of God shown to us in Exodus 12 and elsewhere.

The 11th - Sunday the first day of the week: Jesus reentered Jerusalem and the temple and cast out the money changers and the sellers of merchandise.

The 11th thru the 13th: Jesus taught in Jerusalem and was held in high regard by the people.

The evening of the change from the 13th to the 14th - our Tuesday evening: The last supper. The search for leaven and the disposal there of in preparation for the Passover of the coming night as was the custom of the Jews - the meal the leaders who killed Christ intended to keep and therefore didn't want to be contaminated contact with the Romans etc.

The 14th - Wednesday: The people turned on the Lamb of God and crucified Him according to the scriptures.

The 15th - Thursday: The high Sabbath of the Passover.

The 16th - Friday: The purchase and preparation of the spices for anointing the body - between the two Sabbaths (before and after the Sabbath), thus eliminating the often noted discrepancies and alleged errors in the gospel accounts

The 15th thru the 17th - Thursday thru Saturday: 3 full days and nights in the tomb.

The evening of the 17 -at the change of days and dates: The resurrection of Jesus Christ and the first fruits of the harvest.

The night of the 18th according to the way the Jews reckoned days: The appearance of the resurrected first fruit saints in the city. Various activities in the invisible realm by the Lord.

Dawn on the 18th - Sunday the first day of the week. The discovery at the tomb that Christ had already risen. The ascension of Jesus to the Father with the first fruits of the harvest to wave before God. An open show of the devil with His ascension on high.

Thursday thru Saturday was the fulfillment of the type of Israel's being led around on the Egyptian side of the Red Sea to tempt Pharaoh to follow and try to regain them.

The activities during the night before the ascension was in fulfillment of the type of the passing through the Red Sea.

Pharaoh (as a type of the devil) was allowed to see Israels on the other side and gave pursuit and his defeat was made a spectacle for all to see thus bringing glory to God.

Sometimes these things are a little difficult for the layman to see because it requires knowledge of the Exodus and the law as given in Leviticus.

Obviously this is but a very abbreviated form of the most detailed and precisely fulfilled prophecy in the Word of God.​
However, we see Jesus mostly unconcerned with Jewish custom repeatedly, so I have come to accept the usual timeline of Holy Week. What I think is more controversial than the DAY of crucifixion is the YEAR of crucifixion.
Jesus (the author of Exodus and Leviticus as well as the gospels and the epistles) was very much interested in making sure that the Jewish customs were practiced precisely so that His people could see clearly how He fulfilled it all in the fullness of time. They were meticulously practiced yearly for some 1500 years by all of the Jews in obedience to the commandment of the Lord to do so.

Both the day of the crucifixion and the year of the crucifixion are controversial for some.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
So, what year does your timeline work with?
I'll defer to you concerning the exact year. It is somewhat in dispute - as you probably know better than I. But it sounds like you've researched it pretty well and have a strong opinion.

Any reckoning concerning the coming of Messiah must of course start with the decree to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem as per the prophecy of the 70 weeks of years found in the Book of Daniel.

The 4th decree of Artaxerxes is often mentioned as that decree. Alternately a decree by King Cyrus is used as a starting point. Better archeologists than me have argued over the exact date of the decree spoken of in the Daniel prophecy.:)

My avenue of inquiry into these things only considers the words and data which we have supplied for us in the Word of God itself.

We do know that the triumphal entry to the city by the Messiah took place 173,880 days after the decree to rebuild the walls and the crucifixion of the Messiah took place 4days after what is usually called Palm Sunday (which I believe to be Palm Saturday).

This is all figuring with a 360 day year for the prophecy - as per what appears to be the teaching of the Book of Revelation.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,429
11,980
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,676.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
How so brother?:)
I do understand however that to depart from a tradition held by those around them is very difficult for people to do.
I follow the Scriptures which plainly state Christ was crucified on the day of preparation (Friday), lay in the tomb on the Sabbath (Saturday), and rose from the dead early on the first day of the week (Sunday). There is no need to invent high Sabbaths which aren't actually on the Sabbath or any of the other nonsense required when you are not able to comprehend that "3 days and 3 nights" is a figure of speech.
 
Upvote 0

Truthfrees

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 20, 2015
13,791
2,913
✟277,188.00
Faith
Word of Faith
AMB HAT ON

This thread is closed for review.

**Thread is now open**

Please remember to discuss the topic and not each other.

The posts in this thread that make derogatory statements about members are in violation of CF rules, and Off-Topic for this thread.


Flaming and Goading
Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue.
Do not personally attack other members or groups of members on CF. Address only the content of the post and not the poster.
NO Goading. This includes images, cartoons, or smileys clearly meant to goad.
Stating or implying that another Christian member, or group of members, are not Christian is not allowed.
If you are flamed, do not respond in-kind. Alert staff to the situation by utilizing the report button.


Harassment
Be considerate and do not make another member's experience on this site miserable. This includes making false accusations or persistently attacking them in the open forums.

AMB HAT OFF
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
No one "invented" the idea of a "high Sabbath" following the crucifixion of Jesus. The scriptures are very clear that that day was the Passover Sabbath and not the weekly Sabbath.

“Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.” (John 19:31)

The high day mentioned by John is not the weekly Sabbath day.. A high day is an annual holy day, or annual Sabbath, as commanded in Leviticus 23.

The annual Sabbaths are seven. The Passover Sabbath is but one of the seven.

Jesus' crucifixion took place on the day of Passover (Nisan 14 in the Hebrew calendar). The “high” day of which the scriptures speak is the first day of Unleavened Bread, which falls the day after the Passover lamb is slain (Nisan – or Abib – 15).

The fact that there were two Sabbaths that week allows for the supposed discrepancy concerning the gospel accounts that the women bought and prepared spices after the Sabbath and that they bought and prepared spices and then rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment.

When they came to the tomb early Sunday morning, He had already risen some time before. He rose exactly three days and three nights from His interment (a full 72 hours) at sunset as the weekly.

The tradition of a Friday crucifixion has absolutely nothing to commend it except blind tradition of fallible men.

Without understanding these events correctly the gospel accounts become hopelessly mired in contradictions and errors.

When properly understood the prophetic picture that develops in the Easter season when compared to the Passover, the Exodus from Egypt, and the crossing of the Red Sea is truly amazing.

Again – I understand that some people may have a rather vested interest in supporting the traditions of their particular church even when they are not scriptural. That is probably even more so true with those who claim infallibility for their leaders. But also for those who place much stock in their traditions.

It’s OK with me. People can believe whatever they want and celebrate whatever traditions they want. But when we are talking about what the scriptures support or do not support – that’s another situation altogether.

Then we have to compare scripture with scripture and let the chips fall where they may.

If you are tradition minded and don’t want to change them or can’t defend them scripturally – that completely OK with me. Your salvation doesn’t depend on getting things completely right - nor does mine.

But if you are a teacher of the scriptures or a leader in general - there awaits a more strict judgment for you if you do not teach the scriptures correctly.

That is doubly true, no doubt, when we are talking about the central event of the Christian faith and a prophecy that the Lord killed hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of Egyptians to get down on paper and which He commanded His chosen people to reenact every single year until the coming of the Messiah.

Why would anyone inhabited by the Holy Spirit of God not want to bring his thinking totally into line with the scriptures He inspired?
 
Upvote 0