• 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. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

    +319
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    I see the logic in what you're saying. But there is also logic in the priests being especially anxious to get the bodies down before the sabbath since that sabbath was not only the sabbath, but also a high day in the festival week.
     
  2. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

    +319
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    To reiterate, we will never be in agreement if your conclusion is that the gospels contradict each other. Let me be clear about that. I will not concede to a contradiction.
     
  3. ImAHebrew

    ImAHebrew Active Member Supporter

    553
    +36
    Christian
    Private
    Shalom Der Alter, I do read what you write and I even make mention of what you say. Concerning Gill, are you sure you understand him? Gill states that it is "a sabbath in the passover week," and you take that as meaning it is the 7th day in the passover week, yet, if you read down a little more he says, "it was the great day of the sabbath," and "is called the great sabbath," because "of the miracle or sign of the passover." Here is your problem. If Gill is telling us that it is a "great Sabbath" BECAUSE it falls on the 7th day, THEN only in the years that the Feast day FALLS on the weekly Sabbath, could it be considered or rendered a "great Sabbath." You see, you nullify the miracle or sign of the passover making it a "great Sabbath," by your "tilting of the windmill." Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
     
  4. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

    +319
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Why would that make sense? What would make no sense to me is the notion that Jesus would send Judas out at night to buy something for a feast that wouldn't happen until the next night, when Judas could just as easily have gone in the morning when the sun was up, merchants were open for business, etc. To send him at that hour suggests to me that they had need of something right then.

    I don't believe you let anything slide with the other. I gave you a valid response. It doesn't say that they ate the last supper before the feast of the passover. It says that he loved them to the fullest before the feast of the passover. More than that has to be extrapolated.
     
  5. ImAHebrew

    ImAHebrew Active Member Supporter

    553
    +36
    Christian
    Private
    Shalom AFraizer, there is absolutely no contradiction with the Scriptures, the contradiction is with the "interpreting" of the Scriptures. I have shown you very clear Scriptures which place the eating of the Last Supper BEFORE the Jews Feast of the Passover, and you contradict these very clear Scriptures in how you interpret them. Matthew, Mark, and Luke's accounts do not contradict John's clear time line, even though most think they do. I don't have time right now, but I will try to take the time to explain how Matthew, Mark, and Luke's accounts do not contradict John's account of them eating the Last Supper BEFORE the Jews feast of the Passover, and then, hopefully we will agree. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
     
  6. ImAHebrew

    ImAHebrew Active Member Supporter

    553
    +36
    Christian
    Private
    Shalom AFrazier, you are reading a whole lot into what John was thinking here. You really think John was trying to inform us that THAT Sabbath was a Great (megas) [day], because the priests were especially anxious about the fact that it was both a weekly Sabbath and a "megas" day? Instead of trying to force John into using a logic that is unwarranted, why don't you just realize that the Feast Days, the Feast Days that Elohim commanded them to be OBSERVED as HOLY Convocations, and in which a cessation from normal or regular work was demanded, why don't you just accept the fact that those "megas" Feast Days are Sabbath days, all by themselves, and can fall on any day of the festival week, not just on the weekly Sabbath. When and if you do accept the proper logic of what John was trying to say, then you will be able to understand how a full 3 days and 3 nights could be fulfilled as Yeshua's SIGN. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
     
  7. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

    +319
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    I agree that there is absolutely no contradiction with the scriptures. I also agree that the true contradiction lies in the way people are interpreting the scriptures.

    You have not presented any clear scripture that places the last supper prior to the feast of the passover. A clear scripture would be, "and when they ate supper before the feast of the passover." That's what you want it to say. But that's not what it does say. It says that before the feast of the passover, he loved them to the fullest. You are interpreting that to imply that the supper itself was before the feast of the passover. I'm interpreting it to imply that prior to that supper, which was the feast of the passover, Jesus had loved them to the fullest. If this passage were by itself, and there were no other supporting scriptures, I would say that it would be debatable which of us is correct. But exegetically, taken in context with the other three gospels that say the last supper actually was the passover, my interpretation is more consistent with the facts in general. I am not contradicting the scriptures by disagreeing with your interpretation of this ambiguous passage.

    I also agree that Matthew, Mark, and Luke's accounts do not contradict John. However, I'll be interested to see how you reconcile the Synoptics with a Nisan 13th last supper. As long as the afternoon leading up to the last supper was the "first day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed," the last supper will continue to be the passover on the evening of the 14th as it became the 15th at sunset.

    And that passage, by the way, is what a "very clear scripture" looks like. It was the day when the passover must be killed, and they made ready the passover. That's what you have to overcome if you are going to harmonize the Synoptics to the interpretation being applied to John. Good luck to you.
     
  8. ImAHebrew

    ImAHebrew Active Member Supporter

    553
    +36
    Christian
    Private
    Shalom AFrazier, thank you, you know I will try my best. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
     
  9. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,476
    United States
    Baptist
    Married

    Oh I understand Gill quite well but I don't think you do.

    That is correct! "not only a sabbath, and a sabbath in the passover week" Does not mean "the Passover Sabbath." Gill is speaking about something out of the ordinary. If Passover or 1st ULB was a inherently a Sabbath it would not be necessary to say "a sabbath in the passover week." Where else could a Passover/ULB "Sabbath" be if not "in the passover week?"

    Hey I think you are getting it. Only when 1st ULB falls on a weekly Sabbath is it a "great day."
    Not when you read everything in context. Here is the quote from Gill again.
    for that sabbath day was an high day; it was not only a sabbath, and a sabbath in the passover week, but it was the day in which all the people appeared and presented themselves before the Lord in the temple, and the sheaf of the first fruits was offered up; all which solemnities meeting together made it a very celebrated day: it is in the original text, "it was the great day of the sabbath"; which is the language of the Talmudists, and who say (d),נקרא שבת הגדול "is called the great sabbath", on account of the miracle or sign of the passover;'' and in the Jewish Liturgy (e) there is a collect for the "great sabbath": hence the Jews pretending a great concern lest that day should be polluted, though they made no conscience of shedding innocent blood,
    (d) Piske Tosephot Sabbat, art. 314.
    (e) Seder Tephillot, fol. 183. 2. &c. Ed. Basil
    "that sabbath day was an high day; it was not only a sabbath, and a sabbath in the passover week" "is called the great sabbath", on account of the miracle or sign of the passover;''
    Here is something I should have done long ago. The Talmud is available on at least two websites.
    Link to Tract Pesachim Chap I Tract Pesachim (Passover): Chapter I. Concerning the Removal of Leaven from the House
    ULB is never called a Sabbath in this tract.
    Link to Chap II rules for ULB Tract Pesachim (Passover): Chapter II: Time for Eating Unleavened Bread and Material Used for Making Unleavened Bread and Bitter Herbs
    ULB is never called a Sabbath in this tract.
    Link to Chap III Regulations for ULB Tract Pesachim (Passover): Chapter III: Regulations Concerning Articles Which Cause Transgression of the Law Prohibiting Leaven to be Seen or Found in the House of an Israelite.
    ULB is never called a Sabbath in this tract. Here is a quote from this tract.

    MISHNA: If the fourteenth (of Nissan) fall on the Sabbath, all leaven must be removed before the Sabbath commences. Such is the dictum of R. Meir; but the sages say that it should be done at the proper time. R. Elazer 1 ben Zadok says: "The heave-offering must be removed before the Sabbath, and non-consecrated things at the proper time."
    If 1st ULB was a Sabbath why would it be necessary for instructions for when 14th Nissan falls on a Sabbath?

     
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
  10. 1stcenturylady

    1stcenturylady Spirit-filled follower of Christ Supporter

    +4,143
    United States
    Charismatic
    Celibate
    US-Republican
    But that High Day could have been another day than the regular weekly Sabbath, they still would have had to get them down.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2017
  11. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

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

    First ... the first day of unleavened bread, when the passover was killed. This is the exact phraseology used in the gospel themselves. So before you get too far, understand that. Two gospel authors are equating the first day of unleavened bread with the day the passover is killed. So far so good?

    Second, I did answer you when you mentioned the lamb not being killed on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. In fact, I recall making the quip that you should use the acronym FOULB instead of ULB, because the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the 15th, is not the first day when no leaven was to be possessed. It was disposed of and burned on the 14th at noon. So the first day of unleavened bread is not the same thing as the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Still with me?

    Third ... this is not me trying to get around something that pokes a hole in what I allegedly want to believe. This is an understanding based on the synonymy of the "first day of unleavened bread" being "when the passover must be killed." Because the gospels tie the two things together, the understanding of "the first day of unleavened bread" needs to be understood in the context of the day "the passover must be killed." Are you following me here?

    Now, the reason the "dates do not matter" is that they don't. Because the passover in the law of Moses is sacrificed on the 14th day, you think that Jesus needed to be crucified on the 14th day. But he wasn't. The first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, was the afternoon preceding the last supper. Jesus wasn't crucified until the next day.

    It is because he was not crucified on the 14th that by deduction it becomes abundantly clear that the physical date does not matter. If it did, Mark and Luke would have reported that it was the day before the passover, not that it was the day the passover was slain, because God would have orchestrated it so he would die on the 14th. But he didn't.

    And Jesus was our passover, but he was not killed because he was our passover. That is just one of many functions he fulfilled by his death. As I noted, he was also our high priest making atonement for us. He was also the scapegoat. He was also the word made flesh. The reason behind his sacrifice is far more complicated than being just our passover.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2017
  12. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

    +319
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Whether or not they would have had to get them down, I couldn't say. The legalities of that are complicated. But otherwise, I agree. Any day of the week would still be a high day if it were the 16th.
     
  13. Yeshua HaDerekh

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

    +1,788
    Eastern Orthodox
    Private
    I say that He was crucified on the 14th. I say when they said that it was the first day of unleavened when the Passover was killed, they meant the 14th after the leaven was removed BECAUSE they ALL BEING JEWS would have known that the Passover was NOT killed on the 15th. That is not even debatable! The last supper was on the 14th.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2017
  14. Yeshua HaDerekh

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

    +1,788
    Eastern Orthodox
    Private
    The High day was Pesakh the 15th, not the 16th...
     
  15. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

    +319
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Your post is ambiguous.

    You say "he was crucified on the 14th."

    But you also say that "when they said that it was the first day of unleavened when the Passover was killed, they meant the 14th after the leaven was removed."

    Then you say, "The last supper was on the 14th."

    The statements in Mark and Luke precede the last supper. It was the first day of unleavened bread, when the passover was killed. And at the appointed hour, when even was come, Jesus came with the rest of the disciples to the last supper. Based on your statements, we are in agreement that the first day of unleavened bread, when the passover is killed, is the 14th after all leaven had been removed. We also agree, according to your statements, that the last supper was, therefore, the 14th, after all leaven had been removed.

    But you maintain that Jesus was crucified on the 14th, which would be the afternoon of the 14th, after the removal of leaven, and before the last supper.

    Either I'm not understanding something you're trying to express, or you're saying something that conflicts with itself. Can you please clarify?
     
  16. AFrazier

    AFrazier Well-Known Member Supporter

    +319
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Not if the day before that high day was the 15th and one acknowledges that the count to Pentecost, first fruits, and the waving of the sheaf, historically, occurred on the 16th. That's a pretty important day, too. Perspective, bro.
     
  17. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    Honestly... Have you put your hand in own bosom? Are you not the person here who <<read(s) way too much into that passage>>? Because whose <<goal...honestly...>> is not, <<to harmonize>>? Whose goal may <honestly> be to compromise, while thinking it's to <harmonize>? If facts in one's mind still need to be <demonstrated> and <defined>, they sure are going to clash with whatever in his mind is uncompromizable <harmony>, exactly for taking for granted <<this problem has been solved>>. While it in all its stark reality still exists! Of course, instead, one would clutch at grass... like you are doing here, which is try to <demonstrate> and <define> <<that Jesus loved his disciples to the fullest prior to the passover>> --something no one doubts or in the least, disagree on-- instead of prove the Passover was killed after the Passover was killed!

    The saving truth Jesus loved his own forever, does not demonstrate or define your or anyone's impossible claim the fifteenth day of the month was the fourteenth day of the month or that Jesus was crucified after the passover meal of the passover lambs' meat and unleavened bread or put in whatever or whichever other manner that cannot ever bend straight parallel lines to cross and <harmonise> at some point in time, it only has to be shoved back far enough into the past.
    Jesus then was killed before the ... 15th...?14th...??14th...???15th...??? It's impossible and you must rather explain how you can even use the words, <honestly>, and <<reading into that passage (John 13) way too much>> in this connection.
    The problem with doing just that, is that that passage is always READ IN ISOLATION with flagrant disregard for the co-existence of the three other Gospel's 100% harmonising and 100% synchronising passages!
    THAT'S the ONLY <problem>... there is, no, <problem> in, or between, any Gospels. The <problem> exists, but exists in and between before decided upon dissonance and disagreement.
    Tradition and Church demand it! NEVER DID COMMON SENSE OR PLAIN TRUTH!
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
  18. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    Well, thank you, ImAHebrew. For the first time you have made yourself clear enough that I am able to understand what you are saying, and I can only say, Thank God I do and Thank God, I agree --- agree with you, ImAHebrew agreeing with the Scriptures! God be praised!
     
  19. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Junior Member

    +61
    Christian
    Married
    Well thanks, My fatal flaw after all proved there's still kick in this old fossil. Are we now engaged in a youthful cushion fight? My heart condition may not even take that strain.
    So, the winner of this bout, ladieees and geeeeeentlemen...........iiiiiiiiiiiis..........IMAHEBREW!!!!!!!!


    P.S.

    ImAHebrew, ever given thought to how much of all or little if any of this day’s “things done” was outside the Eternal and Predestinating Council of Almighty God?
    You ever thought how long it took to have that tomb "chiselled out in rock" to have it "ready at hand" at the appointed season and day and hour and MOMENT?

    Or do you like AFrazier believe (at any cost), <<…teaching others in a matter-of-fact way, and that's a dangerous thing … The date is irrelevant to the theology. The theology is irrelevant to the date…>>?
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
  20. ImAHebrew

    ImAHebrew Active Member Supporter

    553
    +36
    Christian
    Private
    Shabbat Shalom Der Alter, did you confuse the 14th day of Nissan with the 15th day of Nissan? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2017
Loading...