What day of the week was the crucifiction?

Look it up! "He is not here. He is risen as He said!"

So we know how it 'turned out'. :thumbsup: Praise His name! :thumbs:

Ed

 

It was Wednesday.

He died Wed. afternoon. It became Thursday at sunset. Since He died on Wed. this would place His spirit in the heart of the earth the remaining hours of Wed. day, Thursday, Friday, Saturday nights and days, but only parta Saturday day if He arose exactly or almost exactly 72 hours later. He arose sometime Saturday evening. Remember, HE WAS ALREADY RISEN when the first women arrived at the tomb early Sunday morn. There's NO INDICATION as to how long He had been risen when the women arrived.

Had He died on Thursday, He woulda had to have been gone all day Sunday to have been gone the full 3 nights & 3 days. Jesus was very specific about the amounta time He would be gone, & I believe it was a literal 72 hours.

He ate the "Last Supper"(the paschal lamb meal the first day of Passover), was busted, "tried", & crucified the same day It began after sunset Tuesday, which then became Wednesday night. By Jewish reckoning, night came before day.

One thing's for sure: "Good Friday" is an incorrect holiday.

But the fact that He IS risen is the most important thing, as Ed said.

 

Is this according to the Roman or Jewish calander? You remind me of a preacher I once hear who talked about what time the gaurds changed etcc.. trying to justify who last verified last he was still in the tumb.

Where does the bible say 3 FULL days and nights?

How do you know it was Tuesday? All we know for sure is it was Nisan 14 that I know of...

Good friday? Why is it not a good holiday?

 

So far, there are three that know what they are talking about, they being "Hope of Glory, "Watchman", and "Robycop". Three days must be accomplished, and the only way for that to be is Jesus was laid in the earth on a Wednesday just as the new day was dawning on Thursday at sunset, or our time of 5:59 P.M. They just barely had time to roll the stone in place, as the High Sabbath Day was at hand, and no work could be done on that Thursday.

The women couldn't enter the tomb with the burial spices on that High Sabbath Thursday, and they could not enter on Friday as the Tomb was guarded, and they could not enter anytime Saturday, it being a Sabbath and also the guards were still there.

No other time or day is possible unless we say God did not make 12 hours to be from the setting of the sun to sunrise, and 12 hours from sunrise to sunset. God calls this a day, and if my math is correct there is 24 hours in a day. He gives us this information in the beginning; He tells us Jonah was in the great fish for 72 hours, and he then tells us He will be in the earth for three full days, and three full nights. We cannot win when we argue with God.

 

Once again, my ineptness at a computer caused it to 'eat', a la Pac-Man® a post I was in the midst of composing, so I'll try again, later. I am curious where some things alluded to by ituttut and some others are found in the text, for I seem to have missed them, somehow. As far as I'm able to determine, only two days are specifically mentioned in the account. And of these, only "the first day of the week" is completely unambiguous. This 'day' by Hebrew reckoning would start at sundown on Saturday, as we would normally reckon time, and end at sundown on Sunday. The second day is "the Sabbath", which in its usual weekly usage would start at sundown Friday, by our reckoning, and end at sundown on Saturday, hence could also be described on a weekly basis as 'the seventh' day, but I do not know if it is here. However, 'Sabbath' has an even broader range than this, as certain of the feast days are described as Sabbaths in Lev. 23. I'm not sure but I believe that's it, folks. Everything else as to 'days' is by implication, derivation, assumption and/or math. As far as I can tell, there are no other specific Biblical pronouncements on any of this such as second day, fifth day, sixth day, etc. and none as to date, at least in the gospels, and the rest of the NT, as well, I believe.

Sorry! Something just came up and I have to run, for now.

Ed

 

PART ONE

Not sure what "two days" you are referring to. I refer to Matthew 12:39-40, "But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 40. For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Jesus wants no ambiguity in this matter. This is where we must start to determine what day was the preparation day. To determine this we must be Berean and prove scripture. To understand scripture, we must do it, and not depend on the Catholic church to tell us what we are to believe.

The Baptists are now falling into the trap that all the other denominations, and the whole world take as truth. I don't know the date it started, but until just a few years ago, I know of no Baptist that would uphold a Friday as the day of His crucifixion. Baptist churches in the 1800's and back didn't observe Easter or Christmas. Error leads to error. Some Baptists are now embracing this great error of a Friday event in word and print. Something I thought I would never see is some Baptists now taking up the call for "lent". Are "Hail Mary's" next, with the "beads", and the statues, and pictures of what man "thinks" Jesus looked like plastered all over the place?

We can trace the steps of Jesus beginning six days to the purpose of God on that seventh day, the Cross, to reconcile the world unto Himself, of those chosen who will accept His gift.

Due to length this information will follow this post. I have posted this or something similar on other boards in the past, and perhaps here at an earlier date.

 

PART TWO

 

LeBuick:Is this according to the Roman or Jewish calander? You remind me of a preacher I once hear who talked about what time the gaurds changed etcc.. trying to justify who last verified last he was still in the tumb.

Regardless of which calendar was in use, there are still 24 hours in a complete day/night cycle. The Jews begin their measuring of a new day at sunset, which varies in time a little each day, while WE begin a new day/night 24 hour cycle at midnight according to our clocks. While ours is more technically accurate, theirs was quite adequate for their use before accurate clocks existed.



Where does the bible say 3 FULL days and nights?

It doesn't...but it certainly doesn't say PARTIAL days/nights, either. And, given the emphasis Jesus put upon 3 days, 3 nights, we have no reason to believe they were anything less than WHOLE days/nights.



How do you know it was Tuesday? All we know for sure is it was Nisan 14 that I know of...

Because He was ALREADY RISEN early Sun. AM.



Good friday? Why is it not a good holiday?

Because Jesus didn't die on a Friday.

 

[

Would Jesus lie? Matthew 12:40l, "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

Is it important for us to know about this information? God expects the Christian to believe His Word. This is the reason we are to study the whole bible, and not just sections we may like, and then take the word of man for things God considers of most importance. We are what we believe.

The Catholics have given to the world two of their Holy Days, and we just eat it up. We take it for granted they know what they are talking about, even though scripture contains no such request. We don't have time for these little details that concern our relationship with Him, and this church that is seen as the "mother church of Christianity" has studied this much longer than anyone else, so they "must be right", which makes the scriptures to be in error.

Who can show the request that Jesus makes of us to remember Him? Does He request we remember his birthday? Does He request we remember and make a Holy Day of His death and resurrection?

So what is the answer? Do we believe what our Lord Jesus Christ requested, or do we just completely ignore him, believing what the Catholic church spreads before us without even studying His Word to prove scripture is correct and man is wrong.

Error can only be proved wrong by using scripture, and on this subject it is so very easy. We prove world thinking wrong here by just reading, and understanding a few scriptures. Again, can we believe Jesus? John 11:9, "Jesus answered, Are there not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world." Jesus is confirming what He as God told us in Genesis 1:5, "And God called the light Day,……..".

What about the dark, the night? The rest of Genesis 1:5 reads "……. and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." 2 + 2 will always add up to 4, and 12 + 12 will always add up 24. So to finish the 24 hour period in John we go to verse 10 in John 11 that reads, "But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light in him."

Are we to continue agreeing, and defending the understanding and faithfulness of the Catholic church in their belief and error, or should we be expounding to the world (and ourselves) our "faith and understanding" in His Word, and His World made up of days measured by hours, those hours being 24.

 

Do remember that in the Jewish reckoning of time, a day includes any portion of a day, so in essence 8 hours could be called a day.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Thanks for the response.
In the Gospels, there is no mention of any other sabbath, so how can we assume that it was any day other than Friday?

Thanks again,
BiR

 

Yes, but when it says "day and night", it means a complete day. Even if it didn't, and you only had part of the first day and part of the last night, it would still require 48 hours, plus the two parts.

 

Actually there are about three, one direct, and the others assumed, albeit they often goes unnoticed, probably because of the tradition of a "Good Friday", that tends to be a monster that doesn't die easily.

The first is Matt. 28:1 where the Greek text has these words to open the verse. "οψε δε σαββατων" or roughly rendered into English, "Now after the Sabbaths". The plural "σαββατων" is here used by Matthew. And there was more than one Sabbath sequentially in view, here, else the plural is incorrect, and Matthew is wrong. ("BTW, the converse does not follow in this." - Language Cop) The YLT is among the few English versions that correctly render the plural.

The second is combined from multiple Scriptures, that have to do with when the Lamb was to be slain. The Paschal Lamb was to be killed "between the evenings" of 14 Nisan. (Ex. 12:6; Lev. 23:5; Num. 9: 1-5 - YLT, Darby) Without getting too deep into this, certain Rabbinic tradition, had 'expanded' the time by three hours to a total of some 27 hours from what would roughly correspond from 'the ninth hour' in the afternoon of 13 Nisan through the start of 15 Nisan, the start of the Sabbath of the feast of Unleavened Bread. However, as the Passover was to be eaten "during the night", the last twelve hours of that day seemed to make little sense, until we today, after the cross, look at it. BTW, "between the evenings" is how the Lord had 'planned' it, hence Jesus and the disciples ate the Passover meal during the night, and Jesus was also slain on the Passover of 14 Nisan. Also remember that 15 Nisan, is the feast day, spoken of in the Gospels. Preparation Day (when the passover must be killed) was a colloquial term for Passover, actually 14 Nisan, spoken of in the above three Scriptures.

The third is found in John 19:31 where it reads: " 31 Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. " (John 19:31 - NKJV) The 'regular' weekly Sabbath was never spoken of as a high day. But the implication is that there was something extra about this day. The feast day could have fallen on the seventh day of the week; it just did not happen to do so, here.

Hope this helps. G'nite, all.

Ed

 

Anybody around here know what "the third day" means?

 

In the words of 'Curly' of The Three Stooges- , "Soitenly!!" It is -

part of the duration of the storm they sailed into on Paul's journey to Rome; it is -

when Jesus was there with his mother at a wedding; it is the time Jesus was continuing to minister during which he sent an annoying message to Herod;

it is when Pharaoh's birthday was;

and it was when Esther went before Ahashuerus.

Hope this helps! "Nyuck! Nyuck! Nyuck!" :tongue3: :laugh:
Oh yeah! :smilewinkgrin: I seem to recall some other citings of this phrase, especially in the NT, in addition to the list I gave abov...

Ed

 

So, by your research, what did the disciples mean when they said that Sunday was the third day since the crucifixion? You know, "today...tomorrow...the third day" (Lk 13) as in "Friday, Saturday, Sunday."

Seemed pretty plain for the first 2,000 years. What's your take?

 

Yer oughter' watch that Blood Pressure, there Pipedude. Getting as angry as your motto appears, might cause you to bite off the stem of your pipe! And then you'd have to buy a new one! :laugh: Oh yeah, I take it you were not all that thrilled with my humor in my last post.

Now, back to our story: And I'll ignore the insinuation and pejorative remarks contained in - "Seemed pretty plain for the first 2,000 years. What's your take?" - as well.
My take is that it has been "pretty plain" in the words of Scripture for almost 2000 years. And when the Emmaus disciples were speaking of since the events, they were not confused, at all, either. I'm not picking on anyone, and am not a research scholar, at all. However the word rendered "since" from the Greek preposition "απο" and here carries the idea of 'away from' a starting point, in this case, the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the burial of the body, which though not here specifically mentioned, is known by reference to "the tomb", being found empty. It would be extremely unlikely, IMO, that the normal use of language with 'since' would include the events spoken of as "since these things occurred". It would make perfect sense for it to be 'after' the events, as this is what 'apo' or 'away from' normally means.

Second is the Lamb being taken on 10 Nisan, and being killed on 14 Nisan. Either a 'Wednesday' date for the crucifixon, or a 'Friday' date for it , given other scripture references would have required Jesus to have been traveling on the Sabbath, beyond the permitted "Sabbath day's journey". I don't have the time or space here to exand on all this, but think I can back it up with Scripture, as well. I shall be happy to do so at a laer time by PM or on these pages, if one likes.

I have posted before on this thread, that Wednesday is too early, and Friday is too late to fit all the criteria fo Scripture. I stand by that.

Obviously there was one and only one crucifixion. The timing of that has to satisfy several Scriptural declarations, many, if not most, of which were made by the Lord Jesus Christ, himself. A sampling includes the phrases
1.) - "...(rise) (on) the third day..." (Mt. 17:23; 20:19; Mk. 9:31; 10:24; Lk. 24:7);
2.) - referring to the temple of his body, raise it - "in three days" ( John 2:19, cp. Mt. 26:61; 27:40);
3.) - "...after three days..." (Mk. 8:31; 10:34 cp. Mt. 27:63) ;
4.) - "...rose again the third day..." (I Cor. 15:3);
the allegation made at Jesus' trial of "within three days (by three days, YLT)" (MK. 14:58) although there is no record that Jesus actually said this, save in the words of the 'false witnesses';
5.) - And lastly fulfill the sign of Jonah, and satisfy Jesus' own phrase of "...three days and three nights..." (Mt. 12:39-40) which phrase, BTW, happens to be constructed in the opposite manner of the normal Hebrew phraseology, with 'day' preceeding 'night'. And for the benefit of a couple of others who are exponents of 'eisegesis' of a 'proof-text', I repeat that the words 72 hours are not to be found here, nor does this text say that "Jesus would be in the grave for 'this time'" either, but that rather He would be in the heart (Lit. bowels) of the earth, not some few feet behind a stone with a Roman seal, inside a tomb.

He was no more placed in the tomb (for He had dismissed His Spirit to the Father's hands) (although He arose from the tomb), than you or I will be buried in the ground or a tomb. His body was placed in the tomb, as my body will some day be, as well, unless the translation occurs before my physical death. And if and when I die, all one will see is the body, for I will be absent from it, and present with the Lord. When the angels come, or the trumpet sounds, whichever comes first, "I'm outta' here!" I ain't hanging around for my own funeral service.

Isaiah 41:21 says " "Submit your case," says the LORD. "Present your arguments," says Jacob's King." (HCSB) Ladies and gentlemen - The short version of the case is hereby submitted! G'nite, all!

Ed

P.S. I make and made no claim to 'research'. Merely what I believe is presented in Scripture.

 

Interesting Ed, so the question then becomes where or what is the heart of the earth and was it Christ the spirit or Jesus the flesh who was to spend time in said place.

 

I wasn't the least bit irritated, and I thought your humor was every bit as funny as you do.

But you didn't ignore my remarks, you brought attention to them instead. Anyway, I wasn't trying to be insulting. You already know and are happy with the fact that you disagree with the Christian tradition on this question. I only meant to state that very fact and to ask politely how you justified such a dramatic revision.

That's all I was referring to when I asked. Such study is research.

The point of divergence between you and the scholars who went before is in the way that you handle the scriptural data. They also had Bibles and they read the same verses you read. Something that should stand out boldly is the fact that most of the early Fathers spoke koine Greek fluently.

You are reading the various expressions (the third day, after three days, three days and three nights) and you are telling us what they have to mean according to your analysis of the words. The earlier scholars allowed those who spoke Greek to tell them what the expressions meant.

Some expressions are not clearly defined in Scripture, but the expression "on the third day" is as clear as a sunrise: it means "the day after tomorrow." The Lord was crucified on Friday and he rose on the third day. That's what Christians have always believed because that's what the text has always said.

You, however, disagree and you surely always will. More power to ya, for I care not a hoot. But I think we all need to understand where the point of divergence is between the two positions.

 

In the book, A Harmony of the Gospels by A.T. Robertson, he gives the best presentation of the day of the crucifixion I have ever read. It worth a read, folks, and I think explains the reason for the day and aligns it with the seeming contradiction on timing between Mark's account and John's account.

Cheers,

Jim