Jesus ate the Paschal lamb before he was crucified

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

There is something I read about Passover starting the day the lambs are purchased for the festival which would be Nisan 11 (from memory).

In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb… Your lamb shall be without blemish… And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.

 

[notRusskiyMir]

In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb… Your lamb shall be without blemish… And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.

The point is that the Temple authorities used some excuse - purchase of the lambs? - to move the observed Passover to Nisan 11. Per the narrative in the Didascalia. Jesus called them lawless so doing such is not a shock. It may be enough that it suggests that the Last Supper was not on the same day as the Crucifixion - Nisan 14. Again, even more reason that leavened bread was on the table then.

The document is clearly ancient. It calls - seemingly - for Christians to observe Pascha with the Jews, but to have a cheerful attitude - what I get from the wording. This joint observance was condemned by one of the early councils, so even though there is much in the Didascalia that affirms much of Orthodox Christianity's practices, there is no Greek text surviving, apparently.

 

[AFrazier]

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.

It says that, "then came the day of unleavened bread, when the Passover must be killed," and in consequence of this, the "disciples came to him inquiring where he wanted them to prepare for him to eat the Passover." The "first day of unleavened bread, when the Passover was killed" occurs before the last supper. Your solution does not match the stated chronology of events.

 

[AFrazier]

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.

Jerome agrees with me, and concluded a Nisan 15th crucifixion. Augustine recognized the discrepancy between the narratives, though he didn't know what to make of it. And John specifically quotes a prophecy; "He keepeth all his bones. Not one of them is broken." John doesn't refer to Jesus as fulfilling the Passover, but as having fulfilled the stated prophecy, which does not itself refer to the Passover either.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The point is that the Temple authorities used some excuse - purchase of the lambs? - to move the observed Passover to Nisan 11. Per the narrative in the Didascalia. Jesus called them lawless so doing such is not a shock. It may be enough that it suggests that the Last Supper was not on the same day as the Crucifixion - Nisan 14. Again, even more reason that leavened bread was on the table then.

The document is clearly ancient. It calls - seemingly - for Christians to observe Pascha with the Jews, but to have a cheerful attitude - what I get from the wording. This joint observance was condemned by one of the early councils, so even though there is much in the Didascalia that affirms much of Orthodox Christianity's practices, there is no Greek text surviving, apparently.

That would not happen. If anything gets moved it would be if the 10th falls on Shabbat, then the lambs are bought either on the day before or after but the date of Pesakh (the 14th) does not move. You are mixing dates up...

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

And John specifically quotes a prophecy; "He keepeth all his bones. Not one of them is broken." John doesn't refer to Jesus as fulfilling the Passover, but as having fulfilled the stated prophecy, which does not itself refer to the Passover either.

The stated prophecy absolutely DOES refer to the Passover lamb. That is fact. “These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: 'Not one of his bones will be broken'” (John 19:36) from Exodus 12:46...

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

It says that, "then came the day of unleavened bread, when the Passover must be killed," and in consequence of this, the "disciples came to him inquiring where he wanted them to prepare for him to eat the Passover." The "first day of unleavened bread, when the Passover was killed" occurs before the last supper. Your solution does not match the stated chronology of events.

The 14th does. They came to Him about it. It does not say that occurs before. It says the 14th came and they asked Him. They could have asked Him on the 13th because that night was the beginning of the 14th (the day when the lambs were killed). Read Mark 14:12 in the original Greek. The word "pro" is used which means before.

 

[AFrazier]

The stated prophecy absolutely DOES refer to the Passover lamb. That is fact. “These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: 'Not one of his bones will be broken'” (John 19:36) from Exodus 12:46...

John 19:36-37 — For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

Psalm 34:19-21 — Many are the afflictions of the righteous: but the Lord delivereth him out of them all. He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken. Evil shall slay the wicked: and they that hate the righteous shall be desolate.

Zechariah 12:10 — And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

John is not making a correlation to any Passover protocol. He's referring to fulfilled prophecies that make no mention of any Passover association.

 

[AFrazier]

The 14th does. They came to Him about it. It does not say that occurs before. It says the 14th came and they asked Him. They could have asked Him on the 13th because that night was the beginning of the 14th (the day when the lambs were killed). Read Mark 14:12 in the original Greek. The word "pro" is used which means before.

protos doesn't mean before when it's modifying a noun. It's a superlative, and it means very first, first-most, etc. It's like hard, harder, hardest. By context, it would be like saying it was the firstest day. It modifies "day" as being one in a series. There's no such thing as a before day. But there is a first day in a series of days. But barring the grammatical argument, it doesn't account for the actions of the disciples, who "made ready the passover," which they couldn't have done on the before day.

Nevertheless, I find it ironic how you can take some of the most ambiguous statements and declare them as factually stating something they don't state, but when something states something unambiguously, you have difficulty grasping it.

They didn't ask him on the 13th. They asked him on the "first day of unleavened bread (which isn't the 13th), when the passover must be killed (which isn't the 13th)," where he wanted them to prepare for him to eat the passover.

Let me restate. The gospels state that THEN CAME THE DAY OF UNLEAVENED BREAD, WHEN THEY KILLED THE PASSOVER. They don't say, Then came the day before they killed the Passover. They don't say, Then came the day when they started searching for leaven to remove the next day. On the first day of unleavened bread, when the passover had to be killed, they came to him and asked where he wanted them to prepare for him TO EAT THE PASSOVER.

So, stop trying to conflate the scriptures. As I already pointed out, they say what they say. The first day when unleavened bread had to be eaten was the 14th, from noon forward. The day when the passover had to be killed was the 14th, at 3:00 in the afternoon. ON THAT DAY, which is the 14th, the disciples came to him asking where they wanted him to prepare for him to eat the Passover. It was LATER, in the evening of THAT DAY, that they sat down and ate the last supper.

To restate the original challenge, please demonstrate credibly how this is not the 14th in the Synoptic accounts.

 

[notRusskiyMir]

That would not happen. If anything gets moved it would be if the 10th falls on Shabbat, then the lambs are bought either on the day before or after but the date of Pesakh (the 14th) does not move. You are mixing dates up...

I am not mixing anything. I simply put in a table what the document states. If you see an error, please tell me.

Now, recall that the chabad article stated that "passover" is/has become/was applied to the day the lamb was killed - which should be Nisan 14, and the the Festival of Matzahs - starting Nisan15 - is also referred to as Passover. In traditional usage, the two blend together but they are different. Perhaps what is being said in Didascalia is that the Temple authorities told the people (or perhaps their 'circle') to slaughter the lamb on Nisan 11, so that they would have celebrated "Passover" that evening and would not be defiled by their activities with Jesus and the Romans that would follow? Then presumably on Nisan 15 they would begin the Festival of Matzahs - unleavened bread. The Didascalia does say that Jesus was killed on Nisan 14.

Yes, it is wild, but the Didascalia, based on its many provisions that are true, which were continued in the Church, was an authoritative document. There had to be some semblance of reality in what is reported. Plus the author is thought to have been a Jew and a bishop. He would have to know if what he wrote is within the bounds of Jewish practice of the day.

Given the Orthodox Holy Week, I think the exact sequence of events is recognized as uncertain, and in effect, not key to understanding Christ's Passion. And in spite of the multiple pages of comments, I think resolving the difference between the Synoptics and the Gospel of John is an academic exercise or a curiosity. Christ suffered, was buried and rose on the third day. That is really what we know.

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

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

John 19:36-37 — For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

Psalm 34:19-21 — Many are the afflictions of the righteous: but the Lord delivereth him out of them all. He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken. Evil shall slay the wicked: and they that hate the righteous shall be desolate.

Zechariah 12:10 — And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

John is not making a correlation to any Passover protocol. He's referring to fulfilled prophecies that make no mention of any Passover association.

And yet there IS a direct association to the Pesakh lamb and Exodus...

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I am not mixing anything. I simply put in a table what the document states. If you see an error, please tell me.

Now, recall that the chabad article stated that "passover" is/has become/was applied to the day the lamb was killed - which should be Nisan 14, and the the Festival of Matzahs - starting Nisan15 - is also referred to as Passover. In traditional usage, the two blend together but they are different. Perhaps what is being said in Didascalia is that the Temple authorities told the people (or perhaps their 'circle') to slaughter the lamb on Nisan 11, so that they would have celebrated "Passover" that evening and would not be defiled by their activities with Jesus and the Romans that would follow? Then presumably on Nisan 15 they would begin the Festival of Matzahs - unleavened bread. The Didascalia does say that Jesus was killed on Nisan 14.

Yes, it is wild, but the Didascalia, based on its many provisions that are true, which were continued in the Church, was an authoritative document. There had to be some semblance of reality in what is reported. Plus the author is thought to have been a Jew and a bishop. He would have to know if what he wrote is within the bounds of Jewish practice of the day.

Given the Orthodox Holy Week, I think the exact sequence of events is recognized as uncertain, and in effect, not key to understanding Christ's Passion. And in spite of the multiple pages of comments, I think resolving the difference between the Synoptics and the Gospel of John is an academic exercise or a curiosity. Christ suffered, was buried and rose on the third day. That is really what we know

No way. So they picked the lamb on the 10th and sacrificed it the next day on the 11th? You now have 2 breaks with Torah. These is no uncertainty in Orthodox Pascha Holy week events...

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

protos doesn't mean before when it's modifying a noun. It's a superlative, and it means very first, first-most, etc. It's like hard, harder, hardest. By context, it would be like saying it was the firstest day. It modifies "day" as being one in a series. There's no such thing as a before day. But there is a first day in a series of days. But barring the grammatical argument, it doesn't account for the actions of the disciples, who "made ready the passover," which they couldn't have done on the before day.

They didn't ask him on the 13th. They asked him on the "first day of unleavened bread (which isn't the 13th), when the passover must be killed (which isn't the 13th)," where he wanted them to prepare for him to eat the passover.

Let me restate. The gospels state that THEN CAME THE DAY OF UNLEAVENED BREAD, WHEN THEY KILLED THE PASSOVER. They don't say, Then came the day before they killed the Passover. They don't say, Then came the day when they started searching for leaven to remove the next day. On the first day of unleavened bread, when the passover had to be killed, they came to him and asked where he wanted them to prepare for him TO EAT THE PASSOVER.

So, stop trying to conflate the scriptures. As I already pointed out, they say what they say. The first day when unleavened bread had to be eaten was the 14th, from noon forward. The day when the passover had to be killed was the 14th, at 3:00 in the afternoon. ON THAT DAY, which is the 14th, the disciples came to him asking where they wanted him to prepare for him to eat the Passover. It was LATER, in the evening of THAT DAY, that they sat down and ate the last supper.

To restate the original challenge, please demonstrate credibly how this is not the 14th in the Synoptic accounts.

It does not say that. It says pro. It does not say THEN CAME THE DAY OF UNLEAVENED BREAD in the original Greek. I am not saying it says "Then came the day before they killed the Passover". I never said they killed it on the 13th.

 

[AFrazier]

And yet there IS a direct association to the Pesakh lamb and Exodus...

Of course there is. That’s when Moses laid out the first protocols for the observance. But John nevertheless makes no reference to Jesus being the Passover. He’s citing Messianic prophecies.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Of course there is. That’s when Moses laid out the first protocols for the observance. But John nevertheless makes no reference to Jesus being the Passover. He’s citing Messianic prophecies.

Which refer to Yeshua's bones not being broken that fulfills that scripture. Give this up dude, you have no leg to stand on

 

[AFrazier]

It does not say that. It says pro. It does not say THEN CAME THE DAY OF UNLEAVENED BREAD in the original Greek. I am not saying it says "Then came the day before they killed the Passover". I never said they killed it on the 13th.

1) I’ve read the Greek in all three gospels. It absolutely does say that.

2) If you’re saying they ate the last supper on the night following the 13th day, then you are, by default, saying they killed the lamb on the 13th, because they came to Jesus on the day the Passover was killed, and you are asserting that they ate the last supper after sunset following the 13th.

 

[AFrazier]

Which refer to Yeshua's bones not being broken that fulfills that scripture. Give this up dude, you have no leg to stand on

I have three legs to stand on. Matthew, Mark, and Luke. We’re only arguing because you’re obstinately refusing to acknowledge plain black and white text. No matter how many times you try to tell me or yourself that I’m wrong and you’re right, it will never be the truth so long as those three gospels exist.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I have three legs to stand on. Matthew, Mark, and Luke. We’re only arguing because you’re obstinately refusing to acknowledge plain black and white text. No matter how many times you try to tell me or yourself that I’m wrong and you’re right, it will never be the truth so long as those three gospels exist.

The text SPECIFICALLY says it FULFILLED PROPHECY?SCRIPTURE. That can only be the lamb in Exodus.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

1) I’ve read the Greek in all three gospels. It absolutely does say that.

2) If you’re saying they ate the last supper on the night following the 13th day, then you are, by default, saying they killed the lamb on the 13th, because they came to Jesus on the day the Passover was killed, and you are asserting that they ate the last supper after sunset following the 13th.

1. I have too and no it doesn't. 2. Yes the last supper was at the beginning of the 14th. Yes the lamb (here Yeshua) was killed during the day of the 14th.

 

[AFrazier]

The text SPECIFICALLY says it FULFILLED PROPHECY?SCRIPTURE. That can only be the lamb in Exodus.

Bro, I gave you the scriptures it fulfilled. You seem to have some serious problems with comprehension and objectivity.