• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured How come good Friday is only two days from Easter Sunday?

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by Andrew4jesus, Apr 25, 2017.

  1. ImAHebrew

    ImAHebrew Active Member Supporter

    553
    +36
    Christian
    Private
    Shalom Jan001, I was wondering if you could explain why the Gentiles did not ask Paul to meet with them on the NEXT day, instead of waiting until the NEXT Sabbath:

    Acts 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath.

    Why didn't they ask Paul to tell them about it tomorrow on Sunday? Or why didn't Paul just tell them, Hey Gentiles, we are meeting tomorrow on the 1st day of the week, come and hear about it then? Why make the Gentiles WAIT until the NEXT Sabbath? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
     
  2. prodromos

    prodromos Senior Veteran Supporter

    +5,695
    Australia
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    These were believing Gentiles who gathered together with the Jews in the synagogue on the Sabbath. Sunday, and every other day was a work day for them and they probably already had to make work sacrifices to be able to go to the synagogue on the Sabbath.
     
  3. Yeshua HaDerekh

    Yeshua HaDerekh Men can dream of truth, but then cant live with it

    +1,788
    Eastern Orthodox
    Private
    YOU said yourself that the 10 Commandments were before the other Laws. "The Ten Commandments preceded the Law of Moses. The Ten Commandments are based on the natural law which acknowledges God as Creator of all things. "

    The Sabbath has NEVER changed to Sunday. Maybe you Romans changed it. Also, BTW, will you be celebrating Sukkot too? Zechariah 14:16-17
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2017
  4. ImAHebrew

    ImAHebrew Active Member Supporter

    553
    +36
    Christian
    Private
    Shalom prodromors, what you say is true. What is your point? That Sunday (1st day of the week) was NOT being worshiped upon AS the Sabbath, otherwise, Paul would have told them to meet with them on Sunday? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
     
  5. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    Amen, Amen, Amen!!

    God's richest blessings must follow this, from, your post!
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2017
  6. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    No; do not attribute this untruth to the Lord Jesus Christ, please, in His Name!
     
  7. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    Just like, for example Psalm 23 and the Book of Jonas, have relevancy for NT believers.
     
  8. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    Unacceptable because unscriptural. No thanks!!!
     
  9. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

    +319
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    [Staff edit].

    When you educate yourself on actual history and ancient culture, it becomes readily apparent just how different we think today versus how they thought back then.

    It is a fact, not an opinion, and not an interpretation, and not an attempt to "make things work" for my point of view — but a fact, that they counted inclusively during that era. I offered you those two books (which, showing the flaw in your ability to be objective and educate yourself, you have dismissed wholesale, whereas we should be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath). They give the complete history of the number zero, which is necessary to the concept of "since." Today we would say that from Friday to Saturday is the passing of one day. In the first century, they would say it is two. We conclude one day because we are counting from zero to one. They counted from one to two. And that's because the number zero didn't exist. While there is evidence of zero-like punctuation as a multiplier in ancient Greece, or as an empty placeholder in ancient Babylon, zero itself wasn’t viewed as a digit of any sort until Brahmagupta in India in the seventh century. Even then it is more appropriate to say that Brahmagupta recognized zero’s applicable value more than he did its independence as an actual number.

    And without a zero, you can't count from zero to one, which is what Friday to Saturday is. Friday is your starting point (your zero), and Saturday is your destination point (your one). Without the zero, Friday is your one, and Saturday is your two.

    Have you ever happened to notice that the Greek, Latin, and Hebrew languages all lack a symbol for zero? Roman numerals start with I. Greek numerals start with α. Hebrew numerals start with א. It's not a coincidence.

    Take a look at a first century Roman calendar. You'll find that their calendar counts backwards. You have the kalends, which is the first day of the month. Then pridie, which means the day preceding, or the last day of the previous month. And then you have iii kalends, which is the third day before the kalends. By our modern counting, iii kalends would only be ii kalends. By their ancient counting, if you do the deduction, the day of the kalends is i kalends, or one day before the kalends, even though it is the kalends.

    You can see the same thing in Acts in the section with the centurion Cornelius. By our counting, the series of events took place over three days. By his count, it was four.

    I'll say again, this a fact of history, not an opinion. You can argue it all day and all night, and you'll still be incorrect. You need to educate yourself on the history and culture of the first century.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2017
  10. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married

    At a glance… may I criticize,


    One.

    Divide days disregarding tradition and Judaist theories. Draw from the Gospel pattern of the passover and apply to the OT and not vice versa.


    In other words, “evening” after sunset is the beginning of days, and from “between the late quarters of days” (‘behn-ha-arba-yim’) – from “mid-afternoon” until sunset is the ending of days, so that

    Bible-days are ‘sunset-days’ (Hellenistic and Hebraic) and

    not ‘sunrise-days’ (Egyptian and Mesopotamian)

    nor ‘midnight to midnight days’ (Roman and Germanic).


    Two.

    Apply this consistency with regard to each of the “three days”, to the Exodus history of the passover’s “three days THICK DARKNESS”, and you will find that the fourteenth was sacrifice-day; the fifteenth was burial-day, and the sixteenth was first sheaf wave before the face of the LORD-day.


    Joseph began his undertaking “to bury” the body of Jesus on the 15th of the 1st month, its “evening” after sunset; not on the same day He died on, the 14th afternoon before sunset! Joseph finished “to bury” the body of Jesus on the 15th of the 1st month, its “afternoon” before sunset, not on the day Jesus had died. And all the pieces of the puzzle fall into place. End of all controversy. Praise the Lord!

    Details to follow, DV.
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2017
  11. sparow

    sparow Well-Known Member Supporter

    +222
    Protestant
    Single
    [Staff edit].

    Better men than us have failed to resolve this matter; the sign was for the evil generation so the sign would need to be meaningful to them; the number of days would not have been mentioned if they were not important; not only did Jonah spend three days and nights in the belly of the fish, did Christ spend three nights and three days in the centre of the earth but the two witnesses of Revelation, *(once again a sign to an evil generation) are resurrected after three days of being dead in the street. Jesus was crucified at the third hour but died later (ninth hour) after fulfilling more prophesy like drinking vinegar and having a sword thrust in His side approaching sunset, instead of having his legs broken which was normal procedure.

    According to E.W. Bullinger; the term "The third day", begins with the third day of creation; three is a number of resurrection; it was the third day that Jesus was perfected. It was the third hour He was crucified; three hours of darkness shrouded Jesus; it was the ninth hour that Jesus cried, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me", "It is finished".

    Quote:
    Luke 24:21
    [​IMG]
    (21) But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed, besides all this, today is the third day since these things happened.
    • New King James Version[​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    This verse is commonly misunderstood in relation to the timing of Christ's death and resurrection. Two of the disciples, traveling to Emmaus, were conversing with the resurrected Christ, though they did not know it was He (verses 13-16). They were rehearsing what had happened in Jerusalem to Jesus by the chief priests and rulers of Judea (verses 18-20).

    This conversation occurred on Sunday, the same day that the women, Peter, and John had gone to the tomb only to find it empty. Yet these disciples heading to Emmaus say that it had only been three days, not four. How do we reconcile this to the overwhelming body of evidence that Christ was buried on a Wednesday afternoon and raised again on a Saturday afternoon?

    The key is in the repetition of the words "all these things," "these things," and "the things" of verses 14, 18-19 and 21. "Things" is modified by the disciples' specifying in verse 20 that they were speaking of the actions that "the chief priests and our rulers" had done to Christ. The fact that is often forgotten is that their ignominious actions against Him did not end with delivering Him to Pilate for crucifixion! (See Matthew 27:62-66.)

    The day after "the Day of Preparation" was Thursday, the first day of Unleavened Bread. These Jewish leaders went to Pilate on the holy day to "guarantee" that their Messiah would not rise from the dead. And with the guard in place and the tomb sealed, they felt certain nothing more would happen.

    Thus, when the two disciples on the road to Emmaus say that Sunday "is the third day since these things happened," they are counting from the last despicable actions of the chief priests and Pharisees on Thursday, not Wednesday. Note that their words preclude a Friday crucifixion as well, since Sunday is only the second day from Friday.

    — Richard T. Ritenbaugh

    "After three days" by the same author.
    'After Three Days'
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2017
  12. DrBubbaLove

    DrBubbaLove Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist Supporter

    +1,670
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    Why don't we accept reconciling it the way the early Christians/Fathers did?
    Was Jesus Crucified on Wednesday or Friday?
     
  13. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    Re: <<Jesus was crucified at the third hour but died later (ninth hour) after fulfilling more prophesy like drinking vinegar and having a sword thrust in His side approaching sunset, instead of having his legs broken which was normal procedure.>> ...
    <<...having a sword thrust in His side approaching sunset>>

    Before you go one, please correct!!
     
  14. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married

    Mark: <<their words preclude a Friday crucifixion as well, since Sunday is only the second day from Friday>>


    <<their words>>, “Today ("the First Day of the week") is the third day SINCE these things ... how (in That NIGHT) the chief priests and rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death and (in That Day) have crucified Him ... were done (finished)”, <<preclude a Friday crucifixion as well, since Sunday is only the second day from Friday>>.


    Now if <<preclude a Friday crucifixion>>, means / is / proves, <<Sunday is the second day _from_ Friday>>, then surely, <<preclude a Friday crucifixion>>, means / is / proves, <<Sunday is the second day _SINCE_ Friday>>.

    True, or not true? It’s true!

    And this is what Ritenbaugh wrote? Yes, this is what Ritenbaugh wrote, <<Sunday is the second day since Friday>>.


    What did Luke write, however? “Today … the First Day of the week (‘Sunday’) … is the THIRD day since” or <from>, “these things ... how the chief priests and rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death and have crucified Him.”


    Will anyone want to go on to read or know what Ritenbaugh wrote? Not I.
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2017
  15. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    These disciples heading to Emmaus did not say, <<it had been three days>>. They said, "it had been three days SINCE...".

    <<the overwhelming body of evidence that Christ was buried on a Wednesday afternoon>>...?!

    There's no <EVIDENCE> at all <<that Christ was buried on a Wednesday afternoon>>. Evidence is not grabbed from a vacuum unless it's evidence of a vacuum.
    So, <evidence> of <<a Wednesday afternoon>> there is none; and less--a vacuum of <evidence>--is there <<that Christ was _buried_ on a Wednesday afternoon>> or on any day the same as He had been crucified or died on for that matter!

    The only evidence are the clear and unambiguous Scriptures that Jesus was crucified and died on the Fifth Day of the week, "the Preparation of the Passover" John 19:41; and was taken from the cross and his body treated on the Sixth Day of the week beginning "the Preparation which is the Fore-Sabbath" Mark 15:42, and was finished buried "while the Sabbath..." Luke 23:54a ("the third day they made the grave secure on" Matthew 27:64), "...was nearing", Luke 23:54b, and the Marys "started to rest the Sabbath according to the (Fourth) Commandment", Luke 23:56b.

    <<Not four>>!

    So that's how we reconcile this to the overwhelming body of evidence that Christ was buried on a Thursday afternoon and raised again "on the Sabbath's afternoon"!
     
  16. Yeshua HaDerekh

    Yeshua HaDerekh Men can dream of truth, but then cant live with it

    +1,788
    Eastern Orthodox
    Private
    You just don't get it do you...
    Why would a dead man in a grave or a man getting swallowed by a great fish be a sign? Yeshua never said anything else other than that. He does this many times, it is veiled. He lets them think whatever they want to think it means. The sign that IS meaningful is THE RESURRECTION. It was that Yonah SURVIVED.
     
  17. Yeshua HaDerekh

    Yeshua HaDerekh Men can dream of truth, but then cant live with it

    +1,788
    Eastern Orthodox
    Private
    The afternoon of the Sabbath was not yet Yom HaBikkurim, so why would He resurrect then?
     
  18. ImAHebrew

    ImAHebrew Active Member Supporter

    553
    +36
    Christian
    Private
    Shalom Gerhard Ebersoehn, have you considered the conflict between Mark and Luke in your calculations? Mark 16:1 states that when the Sabbath was PAST, the women purchase the ingredients for making the burial ointments, and Luke 23:55-56 states that the women who had came with Yeshua from Galilee, RETURNED, and prepared the burial ointments, and THEN rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment. Don't you think that for the women to be able to prepare the burial ointments that they FIRST had to purchase the ingredients? But Mark has them purchasing the ingredients AFTER the Sabbath, and Luke has them preparing them BEFORE the Sabbath. Something is "amiss" don't you think?

    There is only one viable explanation. The day which followed Yeshua's suffering and death, was a High Day - 15th day of the 1st month - a holy convocation and no servile work - a Sabbath (John 19:31, Leviticus 23:6-7). Mark's account is speaking about THIS Sabbath/High Day, and WHEN it was PAST, the women went out to purchase the ingredients. This would have taken place on Friday. The process to make burial perfumes/ointments was quite extensive. A fire would be required, boiling of the oil, adding in the spices, and COOKING it. After if cools down, they would skim off the residue on top and then collect the perfume/ointment. This whole process would have taken ALL day Friday, which then allows for what Luke states, that they returned to where they had come from, prepared the perfumes/ointments, and then rested on the WEEKLY Sabbath in obedience to the command (Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy.) Both Mark and Luke were correct, it's just that Mark is referencing the High Day Sabbath, and Luke the weekly Sabbath. Problem solved! Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
     
  19. sparow

    sparow Well-Known Member Supporter

    +222
    Protestant
    Single
    Thanks for contributing to the confusion: from memory the claim is the spices were brought on Friday and then had to wait for Saturday to pass before they could use them; If Thursday was the high day referred to then Wednesday would have been a preparation day also.

    These days with computers and knowledge of astronomy the should be able to tell us if Thursday was the High day or not for that year.

    [Staff edit].
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2017
  20. Jan001

    Jan001 Newbie Supporter

    +163
    Catholic
    Married
    I have no quarrel with Josephus. I am merely stating that one person's perspective of historical events may not be the complete story. We can surmise this by reading about the one and only crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ from three or four different writers' perspectives in the gospels. :)

    Those "outside of Christ" believe in vain that the "Old Covenant still stands".

    I don't plan to get into a discussion on this thread about this topic, but I will explain some Scriptures which I think support my belief on this topic.

    2000 years ago, Jesus Christ made a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Jesus' new covenant made the first/old covenant obsolete, It is no longer in force. By the end of 70 A.D. God had taken away the temple and the animal sacrifices and He had made circumcision obsolete. Circumcision no longer has any purpose in His kingdom, but it was a requirement for all Israelite males for membership in His Old Covenant.

    Genesis 17:14
    Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.” rsv​

    The ten tribes of the house of Israel had scattered throughout the whole known world and had intermarried with Gentiles long before Jesus was born. Jesus' new covenant makes it possible for both the Jews (house of Judah which includes Benjamin) and the ten lost tribes of Israel's descendants (Gentiles) to become His own people.

    Jeremiah 31:31-33
    “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant which they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. rsv

    Hebrews 8:13
    In speaking of a new covenant he treats the first as obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. rsv

    John 14:6
    Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me. rsv

    Romans 11:19-21
    You will say, “Branches (Jews) were broken off so that I (Gentile) might be grafted in.” 20 That is true. They (the Jews) were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast only through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches (Jews), neither will he spare you (Gentile). rsv

    Romans 9:30-33;10:1-4
    What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, righteousness through faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued the righteousness which is based on law did not succeed in fulfilling that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it through faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 as it is written,
    “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone that will make men stumble,
    a rock that will make them fall;
    and he who believes in him will not be put to shame.”
    10:1-4 Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they (Israel/Jews) may be saved. 2 I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but it is not enlightened. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking to establish their own, they (Israel/Jews) did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end (finisher) of the law (of Moses), that every one who has faith (in Jesus Christ) may be justified.
    Christ ended the law of Moses by finishing it/fulfilling it/completing it and that is why the first/old covenant is obsolete/no longer in force.

    Christ's new covenant is now in force for all people for all time. Luke 1:31-33

    Under Jesus' new covenant, it is "belief and Baptism" and not circumcision which saves a person and makes him a member of the people of God.

    Mark 16:16
    He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. rsv​

    Galatians 5:6
    For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love. rsv

    Galatians 6:15
    For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. rsv​
     
Loading...