Jesus ate the Paschal lamb before he was crucified

[notRusskiyMir]

Again, Passover, the day, the 14th, is when the lambs were killed. The seder is held when the 14th changed to the 15th, at sundown. The 15th is the 1st of unleavened. All Jews know this, it is not even debatable. As I said, some say Passover for both feasts (Passover as well as the days of unleavened). Passover – 14th or 15th? - Aish.com

"the holiday of "Pesach" actually began the day of the 14th, ending the night of the 15th."

Thank you for coming around to the correct answer. Go back and read what you wrote before. Not the same as here.

Therefore, Jesus died on Nissan 14, just as the Paschal Lamb was slaughtered on Nissan 14, if John 19:14 is your reference. It is mine and that of the Orthodox Church.

Answering the OP, No! Jesus did NOT eat the Paschal Lamb before He was crucified, if John 19:14 is your reference. John 19:14 is consistent with the Jewish practice/calendar. The Synoptic Gospels are not, and can lead to the ridiculous assertion that is the OP.

As to, "the holiday of "Pesach" actually began the day of the 14th, ending the night of the 15th.".... Passover begins on Nissan 15 and continues for several days. Once again, please see this:

https://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/3283921/jewish/Why-Is-Passover-on-Nissan-15-Not-Nissan-14.htm

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Thank you for coming around to the correct answer. Go back and read what you wrote before. Not the same as here.

Therefore, Jesus died on Nissan 14, just as the Paschal Lamb was slaughtered on Nissan 14, if John 19:14 is your reference. It is mine and that of the Orthodox Church.

Answering the OP, No! Jesus did NOT eat the Paschal Lamb before He was crucified, if John 19:14 is your reference. John 19:14 is consistent with the Jewish practice/calendar. The Synoptic Gospels are not, and can lead to the ridiculous assertion that is the OP.

As to, "the holiday of "Pesach" actually began the day of the 14th, ending the night of the 15th.".... Passover begins on Nissan 15 and continues for several days. Once again, please see this:

https://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/3283921/jewish/Why-Is-Passover-on-Nissan-15-Not-Nissan-14.htm

I didn't "come around to the correct answer". I have never changed my position. " On the fourteenth day of the first month is the Passover of the Lord. And on the fifteenth day of this month is the feast; unleavened bread shall be eaten for seven days."

 

[notRusskiyMir]

I didn't "come around to the correct answer". I have never changed my position. " On the fourteenth day of the first month is the Passover of the Lord. And on the fifteenth day of this month is the feast; unleavened bread shall be eaten for seven days."

But we agree that Jesus did NOT eat the Paschal Lamb before he was crucified.

 

[AFrazier]

Thank you for coming around to the correct answer. Go back and read what you wrote before. Not the same as here.

Therefore, Jesus died on Nissan 14, just as the Paschal Lamb was slaughtered on Nissan 14, if John 19:14 is your reference. It is mine and that of the Orthodox Church.

Answering the OP, No! Jesus did NOT eat the Paschal Lamb before He was crucified, if John 19:14 is your reference. John 19:14 is consistent with the Jewish practice/calendar. The Synoptic Gospels are not, and can lead to the ridiculous assertion that is the OP.

As to, "the holiday of "Pesach" actually began the day of the 14th, ending the night of the 15th.".... Passover begins on Nissan 15 and continues for several days. Once again, please see this:

https://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/3283921/jewish/Why-Is-Passover-on-Nissan-15-Not-Nissan-14.htm

So, what you're saying here is that three gospels are actually wrong. "John 19:14 is consistent with the Jewish practice/calendar. The Synoptic Gospels are not [ . . . ]" You might want to reconsider your position if your conclusion is based on the outright denial of plainly stated scripture. While Jesus the Way up there thinks the date of the crucifixion is devastating to the faith if you don't match it precisely, disparaging the integrity of the gospels themselves would entirely undermine our faith.

 

[notRusskiyMir]

So, what you're saying here is that three gospels are actually wrong. "John 19:14 is consistent with the Jewish practice/calendar. The Synoptic Gospels are not [ . . . ]" You might want to reconsider your position if your conclusion is based on the outright denial of plainly stated scripture. While Jesus the Way up there thinks the date of the crucifixion is devastating to the faith if you don't match it precisely, disparaging the integrity of the gospels themselves would entirely undermine our faith.

Explain Matthew 27:62-66. The Day of Preparation is Nissan 14. The Temple authorities came to Pilate the day after Nissan 14 for the Body. So, Christ died on Nissan 14.
We're back on the same point. Mine is that John clarifies the Synoptics. And as noted by the cited text, the Synoptics were not always consistent.
John to the rescue!

 

[AFrazier]

Explain Matthew 27:62-66. The Day of Preparation is Nissan 14. The Temple authorities came to Pilate the day after Nissan 14 for the Body. So, Christ died on Nissan 14.
We're back on the same point. Mine is that John clarifies the Synoptics. And as noted by the cited text, the Synoptics were not always consistent.
John to the rescue!

The day of preparation is Friday. The date is irrelevant. The following Friday would have been the day of preparation also. This is explicitly defined in Mark. The preparation is the day before the Sabbath.

I already gave you a viable explanation about the particular phrase. Preparation of the Passover means that it was Friday of Passover week. If you don't agree with that, then I can't help you with that.

The Synoptics and John are perfectly paralleled. Only people who think the crucifixion occurred on the 14th have interpretive issues.

 

[notRusskiyMir]

The day of preparation is Friday. The date is irrelevant. The following Friday would have been the day of preparation also. This is explicitly defined in Mark. The preparation is the day before the Sabbath.

I already gave you a viable explanation about the particular phrase. Preparation of the Passover means that it was Friday of Passover week. If you don't agree with that, then I can't help you with that.

The Synoptics and John are perfectly paralleled. Only people who think the crucifixion occurred on the 14th have interpretive issues.

Only people who think the crucifixion occurred on the 14th have interpretive issues

Then you must explain how Christ was in the Tomb for 3 days.
Beyond that, the issue is John versus the Synoptics, or more precisely John versus the John deniers.

 

[AFrazier]

Then you must explain how Christ was in the Tomb for 3 days.
Beyond that, the issue is John versus the Synoptics, or more precisely John versus the John deniers.

Friday is one day. Saturday is two days. Sunday is three days. As with the other, if you choose not to agree with inclusive counting (which was prevalent throughout the ancient world), I can’t help you with that. There are plenty of passages to demonstrate synonymy between ordinal and cardinal phraseology. The disciples in Emmaus were clear that Sunday was the third day.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Then you must explain how Christ was in the Tomb for 3 days.
Beyond that, the issue is John versus the Synoptics, or more precisely John versus the John deniers.

No, you are not correct. Your chronology for Orthodox rendering is wrong. We believe He died on the 14th (Friday), buried before sunset, rested in the tomb on Shabbat and raised after sunset (Pascha is midnight). That is 3 days. Friday before sunset, Saturday and Sunday. The last supper was on Thursday evening after sunset (which is actually Friday). All Orthodox know this. Go post your chronology above on the Orthodox board and you will see that you are wrong...I guess you did not read what was written at the bottom of the link you shared:
"The earliest evidence from scriptures and tradition suggest that Jesus was crucified and died on the 14th day of the Jewish month of Nisan, a Friday. This means Jesus would have been resurrected on the 16th of Nisan, a Sunday."

Show your Orthodox evidence - the poorly worded citation from the goa website is not good. I showed mine.
I showed that on Holy Thursday evening, the Passion is read up to and including the Temple Authorities asking Pilate for a guard the next day. Why would that be on a Thursday?
Also, Holy Thursday morning, the Institution of the Eucharist is commemorated. Why on Thursday morning and not Wednesday evening? In Roman times, the days were figured from the sunset the day before. So, technically Thursday morning was the same day as Wednesday evening. The Roman calendar was still used when the liturgy was prepared. Also, just speculating, that the Church wanted the Eucharist to be commemorated during the day, as Christ is the light of the World. Therefore there is a healing service on Holy Wednesday evening.
The article I provided was not accurate in all things. You are trying to make Orthodox into Roman Catholics. Yes, Jesus died on Nissan 14. That day was a Thursday.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I DID show my evidence. "The earliest evidence from scriptures and tradition suggest that Jesus was crucified and died on the 14th day of the Jewish month of Nisan, a Friday. This means Jesus would have been resurrected on the 16th of Nisan, a Sunday." Please go on to the Orthodox board here on CF and tell them your chronology and you will see that you are wrong. How am I trying to make Orthodoxy into Roman Catholics? Nisan 14th was a FRIDAY, the day of preparation. . He rose ON THE 3RD DAY...Friday day 1, Saturday day 2 and Sunday day 3.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Friday is one day. Saturday is two days. Sunday is three days. As with the other, if you choose not to agree with inclusive counting (which was prevalent throughout the ancient world), I can’t help you with that. There are plenty of passages to demonstrate synonymy between ordinal and cardinal phraseology. The disciples in Emmaus were clear that Sunday was the third day.

I agree with you here and have many times in the past used the eyewitnesses on the road to Emmaus to illustrate that point. However we still disagree regarding Friday being the 14th (what I say) and the 15th (which is your assumption). I guess someone reported the other thread (you?) so they closed it for review. Did you figure out why He could not have been crucified on the 15th yet? Also, did you see my reference from the Mishanah regarding holding the trial at night being illegal? "In cases of capital law, the court judges during the daytime, and concludes the deliberations and issues the ruling only in the daytime. In cases of capital law, the court may conclude the deliberations and issue the ruling even on that same day to acquit the accused, but must wait until the following day to find him liable. Therefore, since capital cases might continue for two days, the court does not judge cases of capital law on certain days, neither on the eve of Shabbat nor the eve of a Festival."

 

[AFrazier]

I agree with you here and have many times in the past used the eyewitnesses on the road to Emmaus to illustrate that point. However we still disagree regarding Friday being the 14th (what I say) and the 15th (which is your assumption). I guess someone reported the other thread (you?) so they closed it for review. Did you figure out why He could not have been crucified on the 15th yet? Also, did you see my reference from the Mishanah regarding holding the trial at night being illegal? "In cases of capital law, the court judges during the daytime, and concludes the deliberations and issues the ruling only in the daytime. In cases of capital law, the court may conclude the deliberations and issue the ruling even on that same day to acquit the accused, but must wait until the following day to find him liable. Therefore, since capital cases might continue for two days, the court does not judge cases of capital law on certain days, neither on the eve of Shabbat nor the eve of a Festival."

There is more to that. As the Boraitha discusses at length, it was their practice, not hard law. They avoided doing it because of Sabbath or festival restrictions. They couldn’t put someone to death on the Sabbath, or on a festival day like the 15th when no work could be done. And their law required that someone condemned be executed within twenty-four hours.

In this case, they took him to Pontius Pilate to have the sentence carried out by a gentile. It is worthy of note that Pilate gave them permission to execute him themselves, and they declined. They replied that it was not lawful for them to put him to death. While most ascribe this to their authority to do so being revoked by the Romans, there are two telling points. 1) They stoned Stephen to death, and they attempted to stone Jesus more than once. They obviously had no issue with carrying out an execution, in spite of any Roman proscription against it. 2) Pilate explicitly authorized them to do so, trying to respect their law while simultaneously staying out of their religious affairs. They refused because Jewish law prohibited executing him on the 15th, which was a holiday Sabbath. The same would not have applied to the morning of the 14th day, where normal work was permitted until the afternoon. With Pilat’s permission, they could absolutely have “seen to it” themselves, as he bid them do, and overall context shows that they had no problem doing so.

The whole scenario with Pilate existed solely due to the fact that it was the 15th. As a blasphemer, they would have readily stoned him on the 14th at the ninth hour. He never would have been crucified.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

There is more to that. As the Boraitha discusses at length, it was their practice, not hard law. They avoided doing it because of Sabbath or festival restrictions. They couldn’t put someone to death on the Sabbath, or on a festival day like the 15th when no work could be done. And their law required that someone condemned be executed within twenty-four hours.

In this case, they took him to Pontius Pilate to have the sentence carried out by a gentile. It is worthy of note that Pilate gave them permission to execute him themselves, and they declined. They replied that it was not lawful for them to put him to death. While most ascribe this to their authority to do so being revoked by the Romans, there are two telling points. 1) They stoned Stephen to death, and they attempted to stone Jesus more than once. They obviously had no issue with carrying out an execution, in spite of any Roman proscription against it. 2) Pilate explicitly authorized them to do so, trying to respect their law while simultaneously staying out of their religious affairs. They refused because Jewish law prohibited executing him on the 15th, which was a holiday Sabbath. The same would not have applied to the morning of the 14th day, where normal work was permitted until the afternoon. With Pilat’s permission, they could absolutely have “seen to it” themselves, as he bid them do, and overall context shows that they had no problem doing so.

The whole scenario with Pilate existed solely due to the fact that it was the 15th. As a blasphemer, they would have readily stoned him on the 14th at the ninth hour. He never would have been crucified.

In John, Judas leaves and everyone present at the last supper thinks he is going to buy supplies for the feast. What do you make of that. If it was the 15th, there would be no need because they were already there. Also, there is no mention of any "15ers" but there is a tradition inherited from John himself of Quartodecimanism in Jerusalem and in Asia Minor, which then passed to Polycrates and Polycarp, etc. So there is a very high historical precedent of the 14th being held with no mention of the 15th crucifixion. So we have 2 apostolic eyewitnesses to the 14th, John AND Philip.

“We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord’s coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who fell asleep in Hierapolis; and his two aged virgin daughters, and another daughter, who lived in the Holy Spirit and now rests at Ephesus; and, moreover, John, who was both a witness and a teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord, and, being a priest, wore the sacerdotal plate. He fell asleep at Ephesus. And Polycarp in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr; and Thraseas, bishop and martyr from Eumenia, who fell asleep in Smyrna. Why need I mention the bishop and martyr Sagaris who fell asleep in Laodicea, or the blessed Papirius, or Melito, the Eunuch who lived altogether in the Holy Spirit, and who lies in Sardis, awaiting the episcopate from heaven, when he shall rise from the dead? All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have said ‘We ought to obey God rather than man.’”

 

[AFrazier]

In John, Judas leaves and everyone present at the last supper thinks he is going to buy supplies for the feast. What do you make of that. If it was the 15th, there would be no need because they were already there. Also, there is no mention of any "15ers" but there is a tradition inherited from John himself of Quartodecimanism in Jerusalem and in Asia Minor, which then passed to Polycrates and Polycarp, etc. So there is a very high historical precedent of the 14th being held with no mention of the 15th crucifixion. So we have 2 apostolic eyewitnesses to the 14th, John AND Philip.

“We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord’s coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who fell asleep in Hierapolis; and his two aged virgin daughters, and another daughter, who lived in the Holy Spirit and now rests at Ephesus; and, moreover, John, who was both a witness and a teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord, and, being a priest, wore the sacerdotal plate. He fell asleep at Ephesus. And Polycarp in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr; and Thraseas, bishop and martyr from Eumenia, who fell asleep in Smyrna. Why need I mention the bishop and martyr Sagaris who fell asleep in Laodicea, or the blessed Papirius, or Melito, the Eunuch who lived altogether in the Holy Spirit, and who lies in Sardis, awaiting the episcopate from heaven, when he shall rise from the dead? All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have said ‘We ought to obey God rather than man.’”

What you’re quoting is in respect to the Easter debate. Some were trying to change the manner of reckoning the observance, and he‘s arguing that from the oldest times they kept it at the time of the Jewish passover. So, I don’t consider that hard evidence of anything. He’s not laying out a chronology. He’s arguing the season of observance. This same person is also saying that John was the high priest (the high priest wears the sacerdotal plate), which he was not. So, it’s questionable just how reliable this man’s statements are.

As for Judas, I have always found that argument illogical. There’s no reason for any of them to suppose that Jesus sent Judas, at night, in the middle of dinner, to procure items necessary for a Passover feast that wouldn’t take place until the next day. The morning would have been sufficient. It only makes sense if they were already eating the Passover and were potentially in need of something. So, I don’t consider that argument hard proof either.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

What you’re quoting is in respect to the Easter debate. Some were trying to change the manner of reckoning the observance, and he‘s arguing that from the oldest times they kept it at the time of the Jewish passover. So, I don’t consider that hard evidence of anything. He’s not laying out a chronology. He’s arguing the season of observance. This same person is also saying that John was the high priest (the high priest wears the sacerdotal plate), which he was not. So, it’s questionable just how reliable this man’s statements are.

Well they were eyewitnesses to the events (John and Philip) and taught the early church these things. Polycrates lived in 130 AD. You seem to want to just discount anything that disagrees with your scenario. It SPECIFICALLY says the 14th. He is VERY CLEARLY NOT arguing the season of observance but an exact date of observance. Also, since the very early church took much from the Temple service, it could just be saying that he was a Bishop (they wore miters).

 

[AFrazier]

Well they were eyewitnesses to the events (John and Philip) and taught the early church these things. Polycrates lived in 130 AD. You seem to want to just discount anything that disagrees with your scenario. It SPECIFICALLY says the 14th. He is VERY CLEARLY NOT arguing the season of observance but an exact date of observance. Also, since the very early church took much from the Temple service, it could just be saying that he was a Bishop (they wore miters).

Let’s be fair about this. Matthew was an eyewitness, too. And he point blank says they ate the Passover. Mark is not an eyewitness, but his gospel is essentially the gospel of Peter, and Peter was an eyewitness. Mark says they ate the Passover. Luke was contemporary to the apostles and knew them. He says they ate the Passover.

The problem you and I have is that I acknowledge what three of the gospels say. You’re in denial about what they say. You’ll never understand the correct interpretation of the event until you first deign to acknowledge that three gospels are saying something different than what you believe John is saying.

No matter how many times you try to tell me I’m wrong, three gospels still say, in plain black and white text, that two of the disciples were sent by Jesus to prepare the passover. Those disciples did prepare the passover. They ate it in a guest chamber that was already prepared, where Jesus said he would keep the passover, and where he would eat the passover with his disciples. The afternoon leading up to that evening was the first day when unleavened bread had to be eaten, and was the day when the passover was killed.

You and I are never going to be in agreement as long as you ignore this reality.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Let’s be fair about this. Matthew was an eyewitness, too. And he point blank says they ate the Passover. Mark is not an eyewitness, but his gospel is essentially the gospel of Peter, and Peter was an eyewitness. Mark says they ate the Passover. Luke was contemporary to the apostles and knew them. He says they ate the Passover.

The problem you and I have is that I acknowledge what three of the gospels say. You’re in denial about what they say. You’ll never understand the correct interpretation of the event until you first deign to acknowledge that three gospels are saying something different than what you believe John is saying.

No matter how many times you try to tell me I’m wrong, three gospels still say, in plain black and white text, that two of the disciples were sent by Jesus to prepare the passover. Those disciples did prepare the passover. They ate it in a guest chamber that was already prepared, where Jesus said he would keep the passover, and where he would eat the passover with his disciples. The afternoon leading up to that evening was the first day when unleavened bread had to be eaten, and was the day when the passover was killed.

You and I are never going to be in agreement as long as you ignore this reality.

And yet sending Temple guards to arrest Him and having a trial at night on the 15th was just fine with you...even though you know it was Halachically illegal. I said multiple times previously, those 3 Gospels do not say what you think they do. Yes we will never agree because you focus everything on your interpretation of one passage while I take everything together, prophets, fulfillments, Judaic and early Christian Tradition, historical documents, etc. What you say reminds me of those who say that He could not be the Messiah unless He was in the tomb for exactly 72 hrs (3 days and nights) and yet He said "on the 3rd day" and "in 3 days". The combined evidence proves you wrong.

 

[AFrazier]

I said multiple times previously, those 3 Gospels do not say what you think they do. Yes we will never agree because you focus everything on your interpretation of one passage while I take everything together, prophets, fulfillments, Judaic and early Christian Tradition, historical documents, etc.

First, just real quick . . . 1) There is no Judaic tradition on the crucifixion, except for one erroneously attributed Talmud section that doesn’t relate to Jesus. If there’s a tradition beyond that, it’s derivative. 2) Prophecy doesn’t trump plainly stated historical fact. 3) Not one gospel points to Passover protocol fulfillments. Even in the case of John who pointed out that they didn’t break his legs, the fulfillment he pointed to wasn’t that Jesus had no bones broken because he was the Passover, but that it might be fulfilled that not one of his bones was broken. 4) Early Christian tradition is so full of bad information, it’s not even funny. And there are church fathers supporting both views, and some who even discuss the disharmony between the gospels and ways to harmonize them. 5) The only historical documents contemporary to the event are the gospels. Three of them say he ate the Passover.

Now, you keep saying that the three gospels do not say what I think they do. So, educate me.

The last supper occurred on the “first day of unleavened bread, when the passover was killed.” Explain how this is any day other than the 14th. We’ll discuss this further once you have credibly done so. Leave prophecy, theology, “it couldn’t have been”s, contradicting passages, and similar out of it. It says what it says. So, how does what it says interpret as anything other than the 14th day of the month?

 

[notRusskiyMir]

And yet sending Temple guards to arrest Him and having a trial at night on the 15th was just fine with you...even though you know it was Halachically illegal. I said multiple times previously, those 3 Gospels do not say what you think they do. Yes we will never agree because you focus everything on your interpretation of one passage while I take everything together, prophets, fulfillments, Judaic and early Christian Tradition, historical documents, etc. What you say reminds me of those who say that He could not be the Messiah unless He was in the tomb for exactly 72 hrs (3 days and nights) and yet He said "on the 3rd day" and "in 3 days". The combined evidence proves you wrong.

I came across Didascalia Apostolorum. From the 4th century or earlier. Extant is in Old Syriac, but Saint Ephiphanios of Cyprus quotes this in Greek. (see 2nd version below.) This is earlier than the Constitutions_of_the_Holy_Apostles - link below.

I used this one in the chart below:
Didascalia Apostolorum In Chapter XXI Look for [ver. 13] and [ver. 17] This is what is said. Note that "of the moon' refers to the Jewish calendar. The day of the week is given, with Hebrew 1st day - Sunday in the Christian calendar

So the Temple Authorities moved up Passover to avoid 'contamination' (word).

Nisan​	Day of Week Heb	Day of Week sec	Note a​	Note b​
10	2	Monday	Caiaphas the high priest; and they took counsel to apprehend Jesus; Judas was paid 30 silver	Jesus was that day in the house of Simon the leper
11	3	Tuesday	Anticipated Passover by three days, and kept it on the eleventh of the moon	on the third day of the week at even, we went forth to the Mount of Olives
12	4	Wednesday	in the night when the fourth day of the week drew on, (Judas) betrayed our Lord to them.	He remained in ward in the house of Caiaphas the high priest. And on the same day the chiefs of the people were assembled and took counsel against Him
			ye fast, and on the fourth of the week and on the Friday always
13	5	Thursday	the fifth of the week, they brought Him to Pilate the governor.	And He remained again in ward with Pilate the night after the fifth day of the week
14	6	Friday	And they asked Him of Pilate to be put to death; and they crucified Him on the same Friday.
			And these hours wherein our Lord was crucified were reckoned a day.	there was darkness for three hours; and it was reckoned a night.
			from the ninth hour until evening, three hours, (reckoned) a day	[night of the 6th day]
[15]	[7]	Saturday/Sabbath	And again (there was) the day of the Sabbath	then three hours of the night after the Sabbath [reckoned a night]

So, Jesus would have been without food and water/wine from Wed evening until Friday afternoon, with water being the much bigger issue.

Another version is below.

The Didascalia apostolorum in English, tr. from the Syriac by Margaret Dunlop Gibson

babel.hathitrust.org

It has an Appendix by a professor who states - in effect - that the above is fully based on the Synoptics, but that the Gospel of John can be accounted for if one states that the Synoptics report the Passover as experienced, while John states Passover as it should be. I understand this in theory but not a clue as to practical terms.

There is something I read about Passover starting the day the lambs are purchased for the festival which would be Nisan 11 (from memory). The Temple decided to make that the Passover. Best as I can put this together. In other words the Temple used a tenuous reason to fudge the Passover for their purposes. Given its "fudgeness" all the more reason unleavened bread was on the table.

The document is interesting for several reasons. it indicates that the Faithful were under authority from the beginning of the Church. As I noted in the table, we are expected to fast Wednesdays and Fridays. The Jewish encyclopedia noted that this is where "The Lord's Day" for the 1st day of the week came from - used by all countries around the Mediterranean in their languages for Sunday.

From the second link:
Page 95 Chapter XXI Fast on Wednesday and Friday. "and do it in these days when ye fast; and on Wednesday, and on Friday at all times, as it is written in Zechariah, ‘The fast of the fourth and the fast of the fifth,’ which is Friday; for it is not lawful for you to fast on Sunday, because it belongs to My resurrection ; wherefore Sunday is not counted amongst the numbers of the fast-days of the Passion, but they are counted from Monday, and are five days."

Page 78, Chapter XVI Deaconesses role is to minister to women among the 'heathen". This is what the Patriarch of Alexandria has recently done. He found it necessary to appoint a (one or more?) deaconess for such a culture that prohibits a woman to encounter a man. That is what this says. They do not have a role in the Liturgy.

Jewish encyclopedia commentary: Quite interesting.

DIDASCALIA - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VII/Constitutions of the Holy Apostles/Book I - Wikisource, the free online library

en.wikisource.org

Click on the sec numbers. Also there is a forward link that is informative.

Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (translation Roberts-Donaldson).

Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (translation Roberts-Donaldson). On Early Christian Writings.

www.earlychristianwritings.com

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The last supper occurred on the “first day of unleavened bread, when the passover was killed.” Explain how this is any day other than the 14th. We’ll discuss this further once you have credibly done so. Leave prophecy, theology, “it couldn’t have been”s, contradicting passages, and similar out of it. It says what it says. So, how does what it says interpret as anything other than the 14th day of the month?

The lambs were killed on the 14th. The last supper occurred on the 14th (after sunset of the 13th). He was arrested that night. He was crucified and buried on the 14th.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

First, just real quick . . . 1) There is no Judaic tradition on the crucifixion, except for one erroneously attributed Talmud section that doesn’t relate to Jesus. If there’s a tradition beyond that, it’s derivative. 2) Prophecy doesn’t trump plainly stated historical fact. 3) Not one gospel points to Passover protocol fulfillments. Even in the case of John who pointed out that they didn’t break his legs, the fulfillment he pointed to wasn’t that Jesus had no bones broken because he was the Passover, but that it might be fulfilled that not one of his bones was broken. 4) Early Christian tradition is so full of bad information, it’s not even funny. And there are church fathers supporting both views, and some who even discuss the disharmony between the gospels and ways to harmonize them. 5) The only historical documents contemporary to the event are the gospels. Three of them say he ate the Passover.

1. No Judaic tradition regarding that specific crucifixion but Judaic tradition and halakha regarding those events surrounding it. 2. And yet prophecies were SPECIFICALLY said to be fulfilled. 3. So why would they need to even mention that His legs were not broken (as the Pesakh lambs) "that it might be fulfilled"?? That WHAT would be fulfilled?? 4. And yet there is no ancient Tradition that agrees with you... 5. And John was one also. As I have said to you MULTIPLE times, it was a Seudah haMafseket, literally a "last supper" before that fast of the firstborn during the daylight hours of the 14th ending with the Pesakh meal that night.