Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are those who maintain that the Gospel of John contradicts the three synoptic Gospels. It does not. The apparent but non-existent contradiction is cleared up once a few things are understood.
We have to start with a fixed point. That fixed point is that all four Gospels clearly state that Jesus Christ was crucified and died on the preparation day, the day before the Sabbath. Here are the four passages which show this.
Matthew 27:57 'When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who himself had also become a disciple of Jesus. 58] This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus....62] Now on the next day, which is the one after the preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered together with Pilate 63] and said, ''Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that deceiver said, 'After three days I am to rise again.' I know the word Sabbath isn't mentioned here, but this passage is in agreement with the other passages.
Mark 15:42 'When evening had already come, because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath, 43] Joseph of Arimathea came, a prominent member of the Council, who himself was waiting for the kingdom of God; and he gathered up courage and went in before Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus.
Luke 23:54 'It was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. 55] Now the women who had come with Him out of Galilee followed, and saw the tomb and how His body was laid. 56] Then they returned and prepared spices and perfumes. And on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment.
John 19:31 'Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
All four gospels show that Jesus was crucified and died on the preparation day before the Sabbath. That's the fixed point.
John 19:14 however, says something a little different.
John 19:14 'Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. And he (Pilate) said to the Jews, ''Behold your king!''
John did not contradict Matthew, Mark or Luke. And he didn't contradict himself. (John 19:4 contrasted with John 19:31. Sabbath or Passover?)
The Passover always fell on the 14th day of Nisan. Nisan is the first month of the Jewish year (Lev 23:5). 'In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at twilight is the LORD'S Passover. By Jewish reckoning a new day began at sundown. So at sundown, the thirteenth day became the fourteenth day.
The Passover was also a preparation day for the Sabbath. But the weekly Saturday Sabbath is not in view here. On the day after Passover, on the 15th day of Nisan, the seven day Feast of Unleavened bread began. The first day of the Feast of Unleavened bread was a special Sabbath and no work was allowed to be done. Leviticus 23:6 'Then on the fifteenth day of the same month there is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the LORD; for seven days you shall eat unleavened bread. 7] On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall not do any laborious work. 8] 'But for seven days you shall present an offering by fire to the LORD. On the seventh day is a holy convocation; you shall not do any laborious work.' ''
Now, Jesus was crucified on Passover, the 14th day of Nisan. Passover proper. But Passover and the seven day Feast of Unleavened bread were so closely connected that they were often considered as one feast.
The Bible Knowledge Commentary New Testament, An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty, p.210 states, 'The one-day Passover was followed by the seven-day Feast of Unleavened Bread (Ex. 23:15; Lev. 23:4-8; Deut. 16:1-8). The entire eight-day festival was sometimes called the Passover (Luke 22:1, 7; John 19:14; Acts 12:3-4).'
Luke 22:1 'Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is called the Passover, was approaching ....7] Then came the first day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.
John 19:14 'Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. And he (Pilate) said to the Jews, ''Behold your King!''
Now remember from Lev. 23:5-6 that the seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread began on Nisan 15, the day after Passover. Yet as you can see in Luke 22:1,7 the Feast of Unleavened Bread is called Passover. That's not a contradiction or an error, it's just that in a popular sense, the entire eight day period from Nisan 14 Passover day, through the seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread ending on Nisan 21 was considered one Feast. At least in a popular sense if not strictly speaking.
In John 19:14, when John says it was the day of preparation for the Passover, he was not referring to Nisan 14, the day that Jesus Christ was crucified, but to the seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread which began the day after Passover proper, but which was sometimes itself called the Passover week. Nisan 15 to Nisan 21.
Ezekiel 45:21 calls the Feast of Unleavened bread, Passover.
Ezekiel 45:21 'In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, you shall have the Passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.... 23] ''And during the seven days of the feast he shall provide as a burnt offering to the LORD seven bulls and seven rams without blemish on every day of the seven days, and a male goat daily for a sin offering.
Unleavened Bread Can Refer to Entire Passover Season
Matthew 26:17 Now on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, ''Where do You want us to prepare for you to eat the Passover?''
Mark 14:1 Now the Passover and Unleavened Bread was two days off; and the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to kill Him;
Mark 14:12 And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples said to Him, ''Where do you want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?''
Luke 22:1, 7 Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is called the Passover was approaching ...7] Then came the day of unleavened bread, on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.
Now, understanding that Passover proper, Nisan 14, was sometimes referred to as the first day of Unleavened bread, Mark 14:12 makes sense.
Mark 14:12 'And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples said to Him, ''Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?''
Jesus, knowing that He was going to be sacrificed, ate the Passover meal early Nisan 14. Now, by Jewish reckoning, a new day began at sunset. When the sun set on Nisan 13 it became a new day. It became Nisan 14, Passover day. Jesus and the disciples ate the Passover meal that evening, and then the events that led to His crucifixion the next morning ensued. Jesus went to Gethsemane, was betrayed and arrested, and endured His trials throughout the night. The next morning, (still Nisan 14, still Passover) Jesus was put on the cross at 9 A.M.
1 Corinthians 11:23 'For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread;
The Jews who had brought Jesus to Pilate had yet to eat their Passover meal. John 18:28 indicates that they intended to eat their Passover meal later that day.
If you understand the above then you shouldn't be confused by John 19:14 'Now it (Passover day-Nisan 14) was the day of preparation for the Passover [Passover week- Nisan 15-21); it was about the sixth hour. And he (Pilate) said to the Jews, ''Behold your King!''
And you should be able to see that John is in agreement with the other Gospels that Jesus was crucified on Nisan 14, Passover day. There is no contradiction.
Quote:
We have to start with a fixed point. That fixed point is that all four Gospels clearly state that Jesus Christ was crucified and died on the preparation day, the day before the Sabbath.
Yes, Mike we do need to start with, as you state, "a fixed point." The only problem is you don't understand what the fixed point is.
Let's follow Christ's footsteps 6 days before and leading up to the Passover for several facts and 'fixed points' which will determine the day of His crucifision and to ascertain the length of time He was in the tomb.
Part of the 'problem' in ascertaing these things comes from not understanding the law concerning the 3 great feasts, [Passpver. Pentecost, and Tabernacles] and not reckoning the days as beginning from sunset-sunset [not midnight].
The second mistake so many make is not knowing/understanding the first day of each of these feasts was a holy convocation, a sabbath.
Jn. 19:31 ¶ The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an *high day, [NOTE: this was not the weekly sabbath, but the first day of the feast and this sabbath quite overshadowed the ordinary sabbath ) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away
*high day, It was called by the Jews Yom tov=Good Day [and is the "greeting" on that day even to today, and is not Passover itself.
Facts: The "high day" was the first day of the feast which began at sunset on the 14th of Nisan.
Now as to the question, "does it make a difference with 'day' Christ was crucified. YES! Christ informed them He would be in the grave 3 full days and 3 full nights. [This excludes the idiom of part of a day being reckoned as a day]. To then say Christ was crucified on Friday and rose on Sunday morning makes Him a liar.
So let's follow Christ's footsteps 6 days before and leading up to the Passover [which takes us back to the 9th day of Nisan; our Thursday sunset to Friday sunset]
We will find several facts and 'fixed points' which will determine the day He was actually crucified, and to ascertain the length of time He was in the tomb.
These passages takes us back to the 9th day of Nisan; our Thursday sunset to Friday sunset.
Jn. 12:1-3
1 ¶ Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.
2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.
3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.
This takes us to the 13th of Nissan or two days before Passover:
Mt 26:2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.
Mr 14:1 After two days was the feast of the passover, and of unleavened bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.
Mt 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, [weekly sabbath] as it began to dawn toward the *first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
*The first day of the week [mia sabbaton which means first sabbath, not Monday] the day of the *resurrection was from our Saturday sunset to our Sunday sunset.
*resurrection. Reckoning back from this, "3 days and 3 nights," we arrive at the day of His burial which was before sunset on the 14th of Nisan i.e before our Wednesday sunst.
Thus Wednesday, NIsan 14th [beginning on Tuesday at sunset] was the preparation day, on which the crucifixtion took place: and all 4 gospels definitely say that this was the day on which Christ was buried [before our Wednesday sunset].
So Wednesday sunset to Saturday sunset would be 3 full days and 3 full nights and would have Christ rising from the dead on the weekly sabbath; not sunrise on Sunday. [Remember the tomb was empty when Mary got there].
Also since Christ was crucified on the preparation day He could not have eaten of the Passover lamb which was not slain till the evening of the 14th of Nisan [i.e afternoon] On that day the daily sacrifice was killed at the 6 hour [noon] and offered about the 7th hour [1 pm].
Then the killing of the Passover lambs began directly afterwards which would be 4 hours after Christ was on the cross and would not have been concluded at the 9th hour [3 pm] when He 'gave up the ghost.'
Joh 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, *"It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost
*"It is finished: Christ cried out "It is finished" at the same moment the High Priest, after having examining the lamb for 4 days, declared the Passover Lamb was without spot or wrinkle, by anouncing, "It is finished."
With all due respect, Mike, you are so focused on the effort to make every word and phrase agree with every other word and phrase that you miss the point entirely, IMHO.
Does it make one iota of difference to the message of Jesus if he was crucified on this day or that?
What do you expect from documents which were written hundreds of miles and dozens of years apart, using different witness accounts? Let alone that between the writings of Genesis and the Old Testament and the writings of the New Testament occurred over a couple thousand years? My wife and I disagree on many things that happened 20-30 years ago and we were both there, both witnesses. I cant imagine the differences my cousins and I might have about my grandfather's acts, sermons, and admonitions.
All of your twistings and turnings, all of your efforts to make the Bible a single document in which all words, phrases, and books agree have caused you to lose sight of the most important thing: that Jesus preached eternal life to all who are right with God and right with their fellow men (and women, to be politically correct).
Here's what I believe. the bible teaches that the earth is flat, and it isn't. The bible teaches that the earth is a handful of thousands of years old. It is far far older. And you know what? It makes not one iota of a difference to the message of Jesus one way or another.
IMHO when one embarks on a journey such as yours, one is easily lost in trivia. Focus on what really matters. Love of God. Love of neighbor. Nothing else matters.
May God's love be with you, my man.
RESPONSE:
>>using different witness accounts<<????
What credible witness accounts would those be? And how many witness accounts are you claiming? There were no Jewish or Roman accounts of Jesus sighting, I gather. In fact, don't the gospels limit Jesus post-resurrection appearances to only a limited number of immediate followers?
All the evangelists had to do was copy St. Paul's story. And Paul wasn't a witness either. (He alone claimed that there were over 500 hundred, but doesn't name even one).
But at least you are aren't accepting the old line that the gospels are inspired and therefore free of error. (A contradiction has at least one error).
Vatican II, Dei Verbum, 11
"Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation."
Or perhaps not.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 02-21-2012 at 02:27 PM..
Reason: typo
Does it make one iota of difference to the message of Jesus if he was crucified on this day or that?
Quote:
Absolutely it does! Christ said the only sign would be His being in the grave 3 [full] days and 3 [full] nights. To insist/teach He died on Wed. and rose on Sunday morning is NOT 3 full days/3 full nights. Whys does this matter? It would make Him out to be a liar.
Quote:
Here's what I believe. the bible teaches that the earth is flat, and it isn't. The bible teaches that the earth is a handful of thousands of years old. It is far far older. And you know what? It makes not one iota of a difference to the message of Jesus one way or another.
First the Scriptures teach the earth is round [see Isa. 40:22]and that the human race is 6,000 yrs old. The 'age' of the earth is not stated in the Word.
However the Scriptures do teach there's been more than one aion/age.
Quote:
IMHO when one embarks on a journey such as yours, one is easily lost in trivia. Focus on what really matters. Love of God. Love of neighbor. Nothing else matters.
A great deal more than that matters. God had the Scriptures written in great detail, even down to minute details on some things, for a purpose. The NT is 'hidden' in the OT and the OT is "revealed" in the NT. Am I making light of God's love for us and how we are to love others? No, but the whole counsel of God is for us to read/understand and share. It's all part of God's great Plan.
What credible witness accounts would those be? And how many witness accounts are you claiming? There were no Jewish or Roman accounts of Jesus sighting, I gather. In fact, don't the gospels limit Jesus post-resurrection appearances to only a limited number of immediate followers?
Well, let's speculate on credible witnesses to the teachings of Jesus.
1) Apostles - those whom Jesus specifically recruited and tasked with spreading the word. 12 of them, and considered by many to have special authority.
2) Disciples. 72 in number IIRC No mention of them being specifically recruited, but tasked with spreading the Word. No mention of having special authority.
3) Others who followed Jesus around when Jesus was in town. Maybe permanent followers, or maybe just part time. Maybe friends or relatives of some who spent a lot of time with Jesus.
I dont believe that the evangelists ever got together, compared notes, and divied up the stories and sayings among themselves. I do believe that the different evengelists may have used "some" of the same sources, but more likely used more "different" sources. Luke hung with Paul, and certainly met some original witnesses to the teachings of Jesus. Mark hung with Peter, and may have been close to some who were in the inner circle of Jesus' followers.
Matthew is reputedly the tax collector named in the gospel, but there is apparently some question from the apostolic fathers on this.
Lets say that John is John the youngest apostle. John is the last gospel written and the tradition is that the gospel of John was written when John was a very old man. Never heard of a very old man mis-remembering events from many years prior?
The point being that did the writers all use all the same sources? Doubtful
My view, based on my understanding of how things work with itinerant preachers, is that conversations happened incessantly. Jesus did not speak from a podium, with students taking notes. Rather, as they walked, or sat around eating, there were numerous conversations occurring. Jesus was, essentially a pharisee, and I mean that in the Jewish tradition which lives today through the rabbis in their synagogues, with discussion, questions, answers, and further discussion. As an aside, Paul was a pharisee, and if you read him in that light, you can find that he is more answering questions than dictating doctrine. This is a long long Jewish tradition and practice. that is what the Torah is all about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient warrior
All the evangelists had to do was copy St. Paul's story. And Paul wasn't a witness either. (He alone claimed that there were over 500 hundred, but doesn't name even one).
But at least you are aren't accepting the old line that the gospels are inspired and therefore free of error. (A contradiction has at least one error).
Vatican II, Dei Verbum, 11
"Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation."
Or perhaps not.
Well, sure, but that assumes that all of the evangelists communicated with each other, and used the same pool of sources. Instead, each evangelist wrote to a particular audience and had a particular agenda. Luke names his audience - a Roman official named Theophilus. Matthew had grander schemes - to demonstrate that Jesus was indeed the long expected Messiah and the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Mark? Not sure. John? My guess is that in his old age, having witnessed the ministry of Jesus, and seeing the rise of heresy and made up crap about Jesus, wanting to set the record straight. Oh yeah and influenced by eastern mysticism over the decades.....
My point in its entirety is that there is a message of Jesus that transcends all the nonsense promulgated by later post Nicean theologians including Augustine and the North African schools, whose doctrines led to unending punishment , infant baptism, original sin, and all the other nonsense that was NOT a part of Jesus' original message.
To bring this back to the point of this thread, when I see someone starting any argument with the a priori position that the bible is 100 percent true and 100 percent accurate and consistent, I see someone who is misguided at best. Cant have a conversation with someone who's starting point is that there is no argument.
To me, the only thing that matters is the message of Jesus. Not what Augustine said. Not what Aquinas said. Not what the terrorists who ran the medieval Christian church said (after searching high and low from here and there, assembling words and phrases to construct their arguments), but what JESUS said.
Thanks for the opportunity to clarify my own thoughts on the matter.
Well, let's speculate on credible witnesses to the teachings of Jesus.
1) Apostles - those whom Jesus specifically recruited and tasked with spreading the word. 12 of them, and considered by many to have special authority.
2) Disciples. 72 in number IIRC No mention of them being specifically recruited, but tasked with spreading the Word. No mention of having special authority.
3) Others who followed Jesus around when Jesus was in town. Maybe permanent followers, or maybe just part time. Maybe friends or relatives of some who spent a lot of time with Jesus.
I dont believe that the evangelists ever got together, compared notes, and divied up the stories and sayings among themselves. I do believe that the different evengelists may have used "some" of the same sources, but more likely used more "different" sources. Luke hung with Paul, and certainly met some original witnesses to the teachings of Jesus. Mark hung with Peter, and may have been close to some who were in the inner circle of Jesus' followers.
Matthew is reputedly the tax collector named in the gospel, but there is apparently some question from the apostolic fathers on this.
Lets say that John is John the youngest apostle. John is the last gospel written and the tradition is that the gospel of John was written when John was a very old man. Never heard of a very old man mis-remembering events from many years prior?
The point being that did the writers all use all the same sources? Doubtful
My view, based on my understanding of how things work with itinerant preachers, is that conversations happened incessantly. Jesus did not speak from a podium, with students taking notes. Rather, as they walked, or sat around eating, there were numerous conversations occurring. Jesus was, essentially a pharisee, and I mean that in the Jewish tradition which lives today through the rabbis in their synagogues, with discussion, questions, answers, and further discussion. As an aside, Paul was a pharisee, and if you read him in that light, you can find that he is more answering questions than dictating doctrine. This is a long long Jewish tradition and practice. that is what the Torah is all about.
Well, sure, but that assumes that all of the evangelists communicated with each other, and used the same pool of sources. Instead, each evangelist wrote to a particular audience and had a particular agenda. Luke names his audience - a Roman official named Theophilus. Matthew had grander schemes - to demonstrate that Jesus was indeed the long expected Messiah and the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Mark? Not sure. John? My guess is that in his old age, having witnessed the ministry of Jesus, and seeing the rise of heresy and made up crap about Jesus, wanting to set the record straight. Oh yeah and influenced by eastern mysticism over the decades.....
My point in its entirety is that there is a message of Jesus that transcends all the nonsense promulgated by later post Nicean theologians including Augustine and the North African schools, whose doctrines led to unending punishment , infant baptism, original sin, and all the other nonsense that was NOT a part of Jesus' original message.
To bring this back to the point of this thread, when I see someone starting any argument with the a priori position that the bible is 100 percent true and 100 percent accurate and consistent, I see someone who is misguided at best. Cant have a conversation with someone who's starting point is that there is no argument.
To me, the only thing that matters is the message of Jesus. Not what Augustine said. Not what Aquinas said. Not what the terrorists who ran the medieval Christian church said (after searching high and low from here and there, assembling words and phrases to construct their arguments), but what JESUS said.
Thanks for the opportunity to clarify my own thoughts on the matter.
RESPONSE:
No. It assumes that scripture is divinely inspired.
"Hence, because the Holy Ghost employed men as His instruments, we cannot therefore say that it was these inspired instruments who, perchance, have fallen into error, and not the primary author. For, by supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them to write-He was so present to them-that the things which He ordered, and those only, they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth." (Providentissimus)
There wouldn't be different versions of inspired writings. Especially, there were not be contractory versions of inspired wrirings.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 02-21-2012 at 06:42 PM..
Reason: addition
A great deal more than that matters. God had the Scriptures written in great detail, even down to minute details on some things, for a purpose. The NT is 'hidden' in the OT and the OT is "revealed" in the NT. Am I making light of God's love for us and how we are to love others? No, but the whole counsel of God is for us to read/understand and share. It's all part of God's great Plan.
Do you really believe that the details on how to smash babies heads with rocks or to cut open pregnant women's bellies when you kill them (and such) is vital detail and part of God's great plan???
That commentary you provided states right at the beginning that all four gospels agree that Jesus was crucified on the same day, but which according to them was on a Friday.
To clarify what it is saying - they all agree that he died on a Friday. They do not agree whether the Friday was Passover or the Day of Preparation for the Passover or the Day of Preparation for the Sabbath. They do agree on one thing: he died on a Friday, no matter what holy day that happened to be that year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
That agrees with what I've been saying on this thread (except that I disagree that Jesus was crucified on a Friday), and which you deny. You have said that the Gospel of Mark shows Jesus being crucified on Passover while John has Him being crucified a day earlier. I have said all along that all four Gospels are in agreement that Jesus was crucified on the same day. That day was Nisan 14 which was Passover day, the day of preparation for the Feast of Unleavened bread which was a seven day Feast. The first day of that Feast - Nisan 15 was a special Sabbath. Now in popular usage, Nisan 14 - Passover day was sometimes referred to as the first day of Unleavened Bread, though in a strict sense, Nisan 15 was the first day.
In all fairness, you (as my previous post shows), have said two things:
1- Jesus died on Passover
2- Jesus died on the Day of Preparation for the Passover.
It's all in the post in which I quote you from the other thread.
You claim that "I have said all along that all four Gospels are in agreements that Jesus was crucified on the same day". You need to be more specific, or edit your posts. You varied your view from that day being "the Day of Preparation to the Passover" or "Passover Day" (again, see my quoted post). NOW you're saying that what you actually meant was that whenever you said "the same day" you were referring to "Friday"? Please.... If that is what you meant "all along", then you should have specified that you meant "Friday".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Now as for that commentarys statement that' [John 18:28] and also 19:14 and 31 seem to imply that the crucifixion took place on the day before the passover meal was eaten,' I have already addressed that in post #33.
You addressed it - but did not persuade anyone except yourself. Again - you're claiming that the majority of Biblical scholars are wrong, and that you are right - yet you have shown to everyone that you are not even aware of the Synoptic vs John problem that has been a mainstay of scholarship for ages. They're called Synoptics for a reason, and John is not among their number for the same reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Concerning the Bible Knowledge Commentary, 'copyright 1983' which you would present as a poor commentary despite knowing nothing about it, here is a review of it and a word about Roy Zuck and John Walvoord, the general editors of that Commentary.
This detailed yet readable commentary, based on the New International Version of the Bible, is ideal for pastors, Bible teachers, students, or anyone looking for a reliable help in personal Bible study. Now with updated contemporary covers, this classic series will reach a new generation of readers. With maps, charts, cross-references, bibliographies, book introductions, and helpful historical background, The Bible Knowledge Commentary Series addresses readers’ deepest questions as it draws them into the truth and power of Scripture.
About the Author
Roy B. Zuck (ThD, Dallas Theological Seminary) is senior professor emeritus of Bible Exposition at Dallas Theological Seminary where he has been teaching for the past 23 years. He has also served as vice president for Academic Affairs and academic dean. Dr. Zuck’s ministry is noted for clear exposition of Scripture with emphasis on application of the Bible to life. He is the author or editor of more than 90 books, has written scores of articles, and has long served as editor of Bibliotheca Sacra.
The Bible Knowledge Commentary is a well respected and authoritive commentary written by the faculty of Dallas Theological Seminary.
I know ALL about the commentary and the seminary - I have had a subscription to Bibliotheca Sacra for many, many years. I assume you have no idea what that is, so I'll let you know. As opposed to the popular commentary you are quoting from (designed for laypeople, pastors and teachers - and NOT for scholars), Bibliotheca Sacra is a semi-scholarly journal for semi-scholars, and is thus not entirely dumbed down for pastors, teachers and laypeople - even though it is primarily designed for them.
It is not known to be the most scholarly journal out there (because of the aforementioned audience in mind) and it has a decided theological outlook that biases its objectivity. Other scholarly journals try to avoid this, and approach the subject fairly - without having an axe to grind, or a point to prove. That is what you have - a point to prove, no matter how much you must twist the Gospels. It is for this reason (which you will find no problem with, no doubt) that your Dallas Theological Seminary's Commentary is not widely used by anyone who wants a scholarly, informed commentary - it's used by pastors and teachers who only wish to buttress their faith with reassuring dogmatics. Even so - it's a minority viewpoint. You will find the vast majority of commentaries (reliable or otherwise) admitting that the problem between John and the Synoptics is a real problem, and no amount of huffing and puffing is going to change that.
Catch up, Mike. Step up to the next level of biblical literacy - you won't regret it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Now as far as this comment you made, 'You are desparately trying to make them agree on a point in which they do not. You can get exasperated that virtually the entire scholarly community disagrees with you and John Gills, but that won't change the actual words of the text.'
Insinuations of desperation and exasperation in the face of disagreement are unfounded and not true, but are made by you in an attempt to bolster your argument by attacking me. People often resort to such accusations thinking that it strengthens their own position.
All four Gospels are in complete agreement that Jesus was crucified on the same day. That day was Passover day.
Scripture does not need to be forced in order to make the four Gospels agree on the day of Jesus' crucifixion, it only needs to be understood in order to see that the four Gospels do agree.
I'm only calling it like I see it, and it appears that most people agree with me. Do you find much agreement on this thread (or the other one) with your views? No - you don't. I guess you're right, and everyone else is wrong. I guess the majority of experts in the field are wrong, and you're right.
My argument is not weakened one bit by your assumption that I'm "attacking" you. I'm attacking your statements, and your preconceived notions - I'm not personally attacking YOU. There's a difference. If you cannot take some dissenting views, then it's time to get out of the kitchen where the grownups aren't afraid to discuss issues that might challenge their faith from time to time. If the shoe fits....
I just have to remind myself: it's uselss to argue with a fundamentalist. They have already made up their mind, and are unable to accept any dissenting views. Oh well.
Yes, Mike we do need to start with, as you state, "a fixed point." The only problem is you don't understand what the fixed point is.
Let's follow Christ's footsteps 6 days before and leading up to the Passover for several facts and 'fixed points' which will determine the day of His crucifision and to ascertain the length of time He was in the tomb.
Part of the 'problem' in ascertaing these things comes from not understanding the law concerning the 3 great feasts, [Passpver. Pentecost, and Tabernacles] and not reckoning the days as beginning from sunset-sunset [not midnight].
The second mistake so many make is not knowing/understanding the first day of each of these feasts was a holy convocation, a sabbath.
Jn. 19:31 ¶ The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an *high day, [NOTE: this was not the weekly sabbath, but the first day of the feast and this sabbath quite overshadowed the ordinary sabbath ) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away
*high day, It was called by the Jews Yom tov=Good Day [and is the "greeting" on that day even to today, and is not Passover itself.
Facts: The "high day" was the first day of the feast which began at sunset on the 14th of Nisan.
You haven't read what I've said very carefully.
I have already said all of the above. The first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread occurred on Nisan 15 and was a Sabbath. This followed Passover day which was on Nisan 14.
Passover day which was on Nisan 14 was a preparation day for the Sabbath which was the first day of the seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread which lasted from Nisan 15 to Nisan 21. That has already been established.
I have also said that the Jewish day was from sunset to sunset.
Quote:
Now as to the question, "does it make a difference with 'day' Christ was crucified. YES! Christ informed them He would be in the grave 3 full days and 3 full nights. [This excludes the idiom of part of a day being reckoned as a day]. To then say Christ was crucified on Friday and rose on Sunday morning makes Him a liar.
So let's follow Christ's footsteps 6 days before and leading up to the Passover [which takes us back to the 9th day of Nisan; our Thursday sunset to Friday sunset]
We will find several facts and 'fixed points' which will determine the day He was actually crucified, and to ascertain the length of time He was in the tomb.
These passages takes us back to the 9th day of Nisan; our Thursday sunset to Friday sunset.
Jn. 12:1-3
1 ¶ Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.
2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.
3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.
This takes us to the 13th of Nissan or two days before Passover:
Mt 26:2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.
Mr 14:1 After two days was the feast of the passover, and of unleavened bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.
Mt 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, [weekly sabbath] as it began to dawn toward the *first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
*The first day of the week [mia sabbaton which means first sabbath, not Monday] the day of the *resurrection was from our Saturday sunset to our Sunday sunset.
*resurrection. Reckoning back from this, "3 days and 3 nights," we arrive at the day of His burial which was before sunset on the 14th of Nisan i.e before our Wednesday sunst.
Thus Wednesday, NIsan 14th [beginning on Tuesday at sunset] was the preparation day, on which the crucifixtion took place: and all 4 gospels definitely say that this was the day on which Christ was buried [before our Wednesday sunset].
I have stated twice on this thread that I do not believe that Jesus was crucified on Friday. He was indeed crucified on Wednesday. But I did not bring it up because my point was not to show whether Jesus was crucified on Wed, Thur, or Fri, but to make it clear that that all four gospels agree that Jesus was crucified on the same day. To make it clear that John does not say that Jesus was crucified on a different day then what the other Gospels say.
Quote:
So Wednesday sunset to Saturday sunset would be 3 full days and 3 full nights and would have Christ rising from the dead on the weekly sabbath; not sunrise on Sunday. [Remember the tomb was empty when Mary got there].
Jesus actually would have risen anytime after sunset on Saturday, which would be Sunday by Jewish reckoning. Since the Jewish counting of partial days as complete days doesn't apply here, Jesus' rising after sunset does not violate the sign of Jonah which specifies 3 days and 3 nights.
If Gentile reckoning is also taken into consideration, then Jesus could have risen sometime after midnight, making His resurrection on Sunday by both Jewish and Gentile reckoning. The Gospel of John used the Gentile reckoning of time as opposed to the other three Gospels use of the Jewish reckoning of time.
Quote:
Also since Christ was crucified on the preparation day He could not have eaten of the Passover lamb which was not slain till the evening of the 14th of Nisan [i.e afternoon] On that day the daily sacrifice was killed at the 6 hour [noon] and offered about the 7th hour [1 pm].
Then the killing of the Passover lambs began directly afterwards which would be 4 hours after Christ was on the cross and would not have been concluded at the 9th hour [3 pm] when He 'gave up the ghost.'
No. The preparation day (John 19:31) refers to preparing for the Sabbath on Nisan 15. Not to the Passover which was on Nisan 14. Nisan 14 WAS the preparation day for the Sabbath which was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread beginning on Nisan 15.
John 19:31 'The Jews therefore, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day) asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
Look at what John 19:31 is saying. The Sabbath being spoken of is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread which took place on Nisan 15. That is the day after Nisan 14 which is Passover. The day on which Christ was crucified. Nisan 14 began at sunset the evening before, and at which time Jesus ate the Passover meal. His betrayal by Judas, His arrest and trials took place during the night after He had eaten the Passover meal. Then around 6 A.M. Jesus was led out to Golgotha where He was crucified at 9 A.M.
Since the Jewish day is from sunset to sunset, and a new day begins when the sun has set, that means by Jewish reckoning, each new day begins with the evening. This is seen in Genesis where it is says 'And there was evening and there was morning, one day.' 'And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.' Also, Leviticus 23:32 with reference to the day of Atonment, mentions keeping a Sabbath from evening to evening.
Now, all four Gospels show that Jesus ate His Passover meal sometime after the sun set on Nisan 13, starting the beginning of Nisan 14.
Matthew 26:17 'Now on the first day (day isn't in the original) of Unleavened Bread (and here it is necessary to say once again, that in a popular sense, Nisan 14 - Passover day itself, was often referred to as the first day of Unleavened Bread, even though in the strict sense, the first day of Unleavened Bread began on Nisan 15, the day after Passover proper), the disciples came to Jesus, saying, ''Where do you want to eat the Passover?''
Starting with Matthew 26:20 the events mentioned include the Passover meal, Jesus' going to the Garden of Gethsemane, His betrayal, His arrest and trials, His crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection.
In John, starting with chapter 13, the passover meal, His going to the garden of Gethsemane ( John 18:1) (refer to post #33), His betrayal, arrest, trials, crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection are all mentioned.
After having eaten His Passover meal the evening before, at the beginning of Nisan 14, Jesus was arrested and tried. Then the next morning, still Nisan 14, at 9 A.M., Jesus was put on the cross where He remained until 3 P.M., the time of His death.
I want to repost post #33 which shows that all four Gospels show that Jesus ate the Passover meal the night before He was crucified. But both events took place on Nisan 14 - Passover day, as opposed to Passover week which involved the Seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread.
All four gospels mention the Passover dinner. Matthew, Mark, and Luke give details about the passover meal that John doesn't, and John gives details about the Passover meal that the others don't.
The Passover meal is mentioned in John 13. A common detail in all four gospels concerning the Passover meal is the mention by Jesus that He would be betrayed by one sitting with Him at the meal.
Matthew 26:19 And the disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover. 20] 'Now when evening had come, He was reclining at the table with the twelve disciples. 21] And as they were eating, He said, ''Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me.'' 22] And being deeply grieved, they each one began to say to Him, ''Surely not I, Lord?'' 23] And He answered and said, ''He who dipped his hand with Me in the bowl is the one who will betray Me.
Mark 14:17 ''And when it was evening He came with the twelve. 18] And as they were reclining at the table and eating, Jesus said, ''Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me--one who is eaing with Me.'' 19] ''They began to be grieved and to say to Him one by one, ''Surely not I?'' 20] And He said to them, ''It is one of the twelve, one who dips with Me in the bowl.
Luke 22: 'And when the hour had come He reclined at the table and the apostles with Him ... 21] ''But behold, the hand of the one betraying Me is with Me on the table.
John 13:1 'Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He should depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. 2] And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him, ...21] ''When Jesus had said this, He became troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, ''Truly, truly, I say to you, that one of you will betray Me . 23] There was reclining on Jesus' breast one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24] Simon Peter therefore gestured to him, and said to him, ''Tell us who it is of whom He is speaking.'' 25] He, leaning back thus on Jesus' breast, said to Him, ''Lord, who is it?'' 26] Jesus therefore answered, ''That is the one for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him.'' So when He had dipped the morsel, He took and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. 27] And after the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus therefore said to him, ''What you must do, do quickly.
Again, the synoptic Gospels have details concerning the Passover meal that John's Gospel doesn't include. And John's Gospel has many details that the synoptic Gospels don't.
Quote:
Joh 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, *"It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost
*"It is finished: Christ cried out "It is finished" at the same moment the High Priest, after having examining the lamb for 4 days, declared the Passover Lamb was without spot or wrinkle, by anouncing, "It is finished."
All four Gospels as shown above agree that Jesus ate the Passover meal the night before He was crucified, but still on Nisan 14. Additionally all four Gospels agree that Jesus was crucified on Passover (see posts #1 and 21).
Hi Pandora. At the Passover meal, Jesus did indeed institute something new. 'The Lord's Supper.' The bread represented His body which was about to be given, and the wine represented His blood of the new covenant which was poured out for the forgiveness of sins. And as you said, the Lord's supper was, and is to be done in rememberance of Him.
With regard to Passover, Exodus chapter 12 explains that Moses and the Hebrews were directed by God to sacrifice and consume roasted lamb as part of the Passover celebration. The blood was then spread on the doorposts and lintel as a sign of protection from the last plague - death of the first born son. The lamb which was chosen for sacrifice had to be unblemished. The sacrificed lamb became a substitute for the Lord’s judgment to “pass over” them. Therefore, Passover was to be observed in rememberance of the Lord for bringing them out from the land of Egypt”.
In like manner, Jesus Christ became a substitute for us, taking the judgment for our sins.
Let me show some comparisons.
1.) In Exodus 12:46 the ordinance of the Passover required that no bone of the sacrificed lamb was to be broken.
John 19:36 'For these things to come to pass, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, ''Not a bone of Him shall be broken.''
Psalm 34:20 'He keeps all His bones; Not one of them is broken.
Because it was the day of preparation for the Sabbath - the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread was a Sabbath day and was the day after Passover day proper, the Jews asked Pilate that the legs of Jesus and the two thiefs be broken to hasten their deaths. They did break the legs of the two thiefs, but when they came to Jesus they saw that He was already dead and so they did not break the bones of His legs.
2.) In John 19:29 Jesus is given 'hyssop.'
In Exodus 12:22 ''And you shall take a bunch of hyssop and dip it in the blood which is in the basin, and apply some of the blood that is in the basin to the lintel and the two doorposts; and none of you shall go outside the door of his house until morning.
The detail in John 19:29 of hyssop being given to Jesus points to Jesus dying as the true Lamb at Passover.
Jesus Christ is called the Lamb.
Isaiah 53:7 'He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth.
Revelation 13:8 says that Jesus is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Revelation 22:1 Jesus is the Lamb.
I hope you will take those passages and the comparisons into consideration.
Hi Mike, finally I'm back.
Was not doing so good.
But am much better to day, thanks.
And Praise God.
Yes I do consider those scriptures as well.
Jesus being 'The Lamb 0f God' for 'The New Covenant'.
As, Jesus fulfilling The Law; did not become 'The Law'.
If Jesus were the passover lamb?
He would've become that which He fulfilled.
He would've become The Law.
He didn't come to give 'the Jews' a new passover lamb.
If He had, we'd be eating 'the passover lamb' as His body.
And still putting the blood of 'the passover lamb'
on our doors as His blood.
Jesus is not The Law 0f God, but 'The Word 0f God'.
Notice Ps.34:20
'he keeps all his bones, not one of them is broken'
This scripture being fulfilled says nothing of 'the passover lamb'.
In fulling 'the scriptures' and 'The Law'.
As Paul spoke of "Christ our Passover' ? - 1Cor.5:6,7
It the context of them being "Unleavened" as in Bread.
Paul did not speak as "Christ our Passover" as in a lamb.
The Passover was The Feast 0f Unleaven Bread too you know.
No one ever said Christ was The Passover Lamb.
This is just another false doctrine made up of 'Messianic Myths'.
I have already said all of the above. The first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread occurred on Nisan 15 and was a Sabbath. This followed Passover day which was on Nisan 14.
Passover day which was on Nisan 14 was a preparation day for the Sabbath which was the first day of the seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread which lasted from Nisan 15 to Nisan 21. That has already been established.
I have also said that the Jewish day was from sunset to sunset.
I have stated twice on this thread that I do not believe that Jesus was crucified on Friday. He was indeed crucified on Wednesday. But I did not bring it up because my point was not to show whether Jesus was crucified on Wed, Thur, or Fri, but to make it clear that that all four gospels agree that Jesus was crucified on the same day. To make it clear that John does not say that Jesus was crucified on a different day then what the other Gospels say.
Jesus actually would have risen anytime after sunset on Saturday, which would be Sunday by Jewish reckoning. Since the Jewish counting of partial days as complete days doesn't apply here, Jesus' rising after sunset does not violate the sign of Jonah which specifies 3 days and 3 nights.
If Gentile reckoning is also taken into consideration, then Jesus could have risen sometime after midnight, making His resurrection on Sunday by both Jewish and Gentile reckoning. The Gospel of John used the Gentile reckoning of time as opposed to the other three Gospels use of the Jewish reckoning of time.
No. The preparation day (John 19:31) refers to preparing for the Sabbath on Nisan 15. Not to the Passover which was on Nisan 14. Nisan 14 WAS the preparation day for the Sabbath which was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread beginning on Nisan 15.
John 19:31 'The Jews therefore, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day) asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
Look at what John 19:31 is saying. The Sabbath being spoken of is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread which took place on Nisan 15. That is the day after Nisan 14 which is Passover. The day on which Christ was crucified. Nisan 14 began at sunset the evening before, and at which time Jesus ate the Passover meal. His betrayal by Judas, His arrest and trials took place during the night after He had eaten the Passover meal. Then around 6 A.M. Jesus was led out to Golgotha where He was crucified at 9 A.M.
Since the Jewish day is from sunset to sunset, and a new day begins when the sun has set, that means by Jewish reckoning, each new day begins with the evening. This is seen in Genesis where it is says 'And there was evening and there was morning, one day.' 'And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.' Also, Leviticus 23:32 with reference to the day of Atonment, mentions keeping a Sabbath from evening to evening.
Now, all four Gospels show that Jesus ate His Passover meal sometime after the sun set on Nisan 13, starting the beginning of Nisan 14.
Matthew 26:17 'Now on the first day (day isn't in the original) of Unleavened Bread (and here it is necessary to say once again, that in a popular sense, Nisan 14 - Passover day itself, was often referred to as the first day of Unleavened Bread, even though in the strict sense, the first day of Unleavened Bread began on Nisan 15, the day after Passover proper), the disciples came to Jesus, saying, ''Where do you want to eat the Passover?''
Starting with Matthew 26:20 the events mentioned include the Passover meal, Jesus' going to the Garden of Gethsemane, His betrayal, His arrest and trials, His crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection.
In John, starting with chapter 13, the passover meal, His going to the garden of Gethsemane ( John 18:1) (refer to post #33), His betrayal, arrest, trials, crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection are all mentioned.
After having eaten His Passover meal the evening before, at the beginning of Nisan 14, Jesus was arrested and tried. Then the next morning, still Nisan 14, at 9 A.M., Jesus was put on the cross where He remained until 3 P.M., the time of His death.
I want to repost post #33 which shows that all four Gospels show that Jesus ate the Passover meal the night before He was crucified. But both events took place on Nisan 14 - Passover day, as opposed to Passover week which involved the Seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread.
All four gospels mention the Passover dinner. Matthew, Mark, and Luke give details about the passover meal that John doesn't, and John gives details about the Passover meal that the others don't.
The Passover meal is mentioned in John 13. A common detail in all four gospels concerning the Passover meal is the mention by Jesus that He would be betrayed by one sitting with Him at the meal.
Matthew 26:19 And the disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover. 20] 'Now when evening had come, He was reclining at the table with the twelve disciples. 21] And as they were eating, He said, ''Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me.'' 22] And being deeply grieved, they each one began to say to Him, ''Surely not I, Lord?'' 23] And He answered and said, ''He who dipped his hand with Me in the bowl is the one who will betray Me.
Mark 14:17 ''And when it was evening He came with the twelve. 18] And as they were reclining at the table and eating, Jesus said, ''Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me--one who is eaing with Me.'' 19] ''They began to be grieved and to say to Him one by one, ''Surely not I?'' 20] And He said to them, ''It is one of the twelve, one who dips with Me in the bowl.
Luke 22: 'And when the hour had come He reclined at the table and the apostles with Him ... 21] ''But behold, the hand of the one betraying Me is with Me on the table.
John 13:1 'Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He should depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. 2] And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him, ...21] ''When Jesus had said this, He became troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, ''Truly, truly, I say to you, that one of you will betray Me . 23] There was reclining on Jesus' breast one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24] Simon Peter therefore gestured to him, and said to him, ''Tell us who it is of whom He is speaking.'' 25] He, leaning back thus on Jesus' breast, said to Him, ''Lord, who is it?'' 26] Jesus therefore answered, ''That is the one for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him.'' So when He had dipped the morsel, He took and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. 27] And after the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus therefore said to him, ''What you must do, do quickly.
Again, the synoptic Gospels have details concerning the Passover meal that John's Gospel doesn't include. And John's Gospel has many details that the synoptic Gospels don't.
All four Gospels as shown above agree that Jesus ate the Passover meal the night before He was crucified, but still on Nisan 14. Additionally all four Gospels agree that Jesus was crucified on Passover (see posts #1 and 21).
RESPONSE:
Not true.
As you have just admitted:
>>Again, the synoptic Gospels have details concerning the Passover meal that John's Gospel doesn't include. And John's Gospel has many details that the synoptic Gospels don't.<<
So:
The Story Of The Storytellers - The Gospel Of John | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE | PBS "Whereas in the three synoptic gospels Jesus actually eats a passover meal before he dies, in John's gospel he doesn't. The last supper is actually eaten before the beginning of passover. So that the sequence of events leading up to the actual crucifixion are very different for John's gospel. And one has to look at it in say, why is the story so different? How do we account for these differences in terms of the way the story-telling developed? And the answer becomes fairly clear when we realize that Jesus has had the last supper a day before so that he's hanging on the cross during the day of preparation before the beginning of Passover."
CH
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
