No. As I said, the fact that Jesus said 2 more days till Passover shows it was at least 3 days.
Monday... It was 3 days... We are in agreement. Count Monday, count Tuesday, the third day begins Tuesday evening at sundown. Passover IS that day, beginning between the evenings.
The Feast of Unleavened Bread spans 7 days. When Pilate came before them and offered to release Jesus to them, as was customary during the feast, this shows that this was during the days of the feast of Unleavened Bread.
The feast, the High Holy Day, is the Passover meal - otherwise the 'feast' is unremarkable except in that unleavened bread is used. They wanted to keep the Passover feast. That's the whole point.
You again quote the instructions for the first passover as though they were continual instructions for the passovers that followed.
The only change indicated was at the time the Temple came into existence - Thereafter the killing was done at the Temple. That is the only change from the original instruction. The doorposts were still coated (in the sign of the cross), the cooking still happened at the residence...
Theologians have debated for at least the last century about the differences in John's passion chronology and that of the other gospel writers. However, even these theological scholars agree that John's chronology has Jesus crucified on Friday and rising on Sunday.
Christian scholars have shown a particular ignorance of the actual Hebrew Holy Days, and have a bone to pick, defending their tradition.
This chronology also fits with the saying that Jesus rose on the "third day."
So does a resurrection exactly in the gloaming - The dusk belongs to both days. In fact, the only way it works mathematically, defending 3 days, 3 days and 3 nights, 3 days legally dead, raised on the 3rd day, raised after 3 days, IS the resurrection exactly in the dusk - precisely as the High Priest exited his chamber to mark the sheaves...
It is only recently that a school of thought has diverged and claimed that John's passion chronology indicates a different crucifixion day (Wednesday) as well as a different resurrection day (Saturday).
The only way for all the Gospels to agree is to follow the more granular account of John.
This "school of thought" thoroughly ignores that every gospel writer has Jesus crucified on the day before the Sabbath [...]
Passover IS a High Sabbath.
and that the gospel of Mark even records that Jesus "Rose early on the first day of the week," and "appeared first to Mary Magdalene."
A resurrection in the gloaming Saturday evening does this no damage. In fact, 'rising
early' would point more surely to Saturday evening, not Sunday morning... It is our gentile sensibility that day begins in the morning that is discordant... In fact, the day is half gone by morning.
I personally don't have a lot of time or thought to focus on this discussion, nor have I extensively studied the various methods that scholars have used to harmonize John's account with the synoptic gospels. If we believe that John's gospel contradicts the others, then we must believe that either John or the three other gospel writers were wrong about the chronology (or were bending facts to fit their point). In that, we must remember that Matthew was also an apostle, that Mark had (so far as we can tell) the eyewitness testimony of Peter to rely on, and that Luke took relied on several eyewitness accounts.
I would submit that the gospel accounts confirm John. I would submit also that the Prophecy demands it. There is no way you could possibly convince me that the events didn't follow YHWH's appointed time precisely. That appointment requires the perfect Lamb to be sacrificed at a precise moment - late in the afternoon on the Day of Preparation. That anyone would claim that THE LAMB - The one prophesied for twenty-five hundred years - was done a full day late is simply unconscionable.
He was certainly presented to the nation on Palm Sunday.
He was certainly inspected for his purity for four days.
He was certainly sacrificed precisely at the time required, in the afternoon of that fourth day.
and he certainly rose precisely in the timing of the marking of the sheaves.
He was simultaneously performing as High Priest and the Lamb.
That is what the Prophecy was *for*
That is what the Holy Day, the Appointed time was *for*
It is Christian hubris and blind tradition that require otherwise. And that, I think, is why he left us but one sign that he was Messiah - Without 3 days and 3 nights, one cannot see the precise fulfillment. Without 3 days and 3 nights, one doesn't pay attention to the detail, and one ignores YHWH's incredibly prophetic Moedim.
As if one ignores what Passover is for, one will also fully disregard the rest of the moedim - every one of which are all and only about Messiah, and his redemptive work for the Sons of Adam.
