The four Gospels agree that Jesus Christ was crucified on Passover (believer, scriptures)
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.
I did not admit anything. I made a true statement and presented the appropriate Scripture (shown above) that shows that all four gospels mention Jesus eating the Passover meal the evening before He was crucified.
All four gospels mention the Passover dinner.
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 26:21-24; Mark 14:18-21; Luke 22:21-22; John 13:21-27). Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper at the Passover meal (Matthew 26:20-29)
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.
You claim that because each Gospel has details that aren't in the other gospels that that means contradiction. It does not. It means that all four gospels complement each other. If all four gospels were meant to be cookie cutter cutout copies, there would have been no need for four different gospels.
RESPONSE:
>>The Passover meal is mentioned in John 13.<<
No. A meal before the Passover is mentioned in John 13.
John 13:1 "Before the feast of Passover, Jesus knew that his hour had come to pass from this world to the Father. He loved his own in the world and he loved them to the end. " (NAB)
Note the plain meaning of words: "Before the feast of the Passover"
Merriam Webster definition -"before" -at an earlier time : previously <the night before> <knew her from before>
The Passover meal would have been held after sundown (6 pm) on the day before the Passover itself. If "before" the Passover, this would have been an earlier meal.
From Wikipedia:
In John, Jesus has his last supper and is executed not on the day Nisan 15 (the first night of Passover) but on Nisan 14, when the Passover lambs were slaughtered.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 02-23-2012 at 06:00 AM..
Reason: addition
Oh no! Liberal scholars! Skeptics!!! Is that an ad hominem attack I detect?
If "liberal, skeptical scholars" are skeptical of anything, it is of the various "truth" claims that conservative, non-questioning believers insist upon before fully investigating a matter. To the latter, dogma becomes more important than scripture - preconceived ideas of harmony trump what one would expect from four different accounts of the same story by four different (possibly more).
You have already made up your mind on certain issues. You already know all there is to know about the Gospels, apparantly.
RESPONSE:
Apparently the writer feels he is required to stick to dogma and avoid the the plain meaning, and common sense meaning, of the words themselves.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 02-23-2012 at 06:03 AM..
Reason: typo
originally posted by mike555
I did not admit anything. I made a true statement and presented the appropriate scripture (shown above) that shows that all four gospels mention Jesus eating the Passover meal the evening before He was crucified.
All four gospels mention the passover dinner.
The Passover meal is mentioned in John 13. A common detail in all four gospels concerning the Ppassover meal is the mention by Jesus that he would be betrayed by one sitting with Him at the meal. (Matthew 26:21-24; Mark 14:18-21; Luke 22:21-22; John 13:21-27). Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper at the Passover meal (Matthew 26:20-29).
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.
You claim that because each gospel has details that aren't in the other gospels that that means contradiction. It does not. It means that all four gospels complement each other. If all four gospels were meant to be cookie cutter cutout copies, there would have been no need for four different gospels.
Quote:
response:
>>the passover meal is mentioned in john 13.<<
no. A meal before the passover is mentioned in john 13.
john 13:1 "before the feast of passover, jesus knew that his hour had come to pass from this world to the father. He loved his own in the world and he loved them to the end. " (nab)
note the plain meaning of words: "before the feast of the passover"
merriam webster definition -"before" -at an earlier time : Previously <the night before> <knew her from before>
the passover meal would have been held after sundown (6 pm) on the day before the passover itself. If "before" the passover, this would have been an earlier meal.
from wikipedia:
in john, jesus has his last supper and is executed not on the day nisan 15 (the first night of passover) but on nisan 14, when the passover lambs were slaughtered.
John 13:1 Now before (still Nisan 13 before the setting of the sun at which time it became Nisan 14, the beginning of Passover ) 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 time is now later, the sun has set, it is now the beginning of Nisan 14 and Jesus is having the Passover meal), the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him, 3] Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from God, and was going back to God, rose from supper, and laid aside His garments; and taking a towel, He girded Himself about.
Matthew Henry's Whole Bible Commentary states the following.
It has generally been taken for granted by commentators that Christ's washing his disciples' feet, and the discourse that followed it, were the same night in which he was betrayed, and at the same sitting wherein he ate the passover and instituted the Lord's supper; but whether before the solemnity began, or after it was all over, or between the eating of the passover and the institution of the Lord's supper, they are not agreed. This evangelist, making it his business to gather up those passages which the others had omitted, industriously omits those which the others had recorded, which occasions some difficulty in putting them together. If it was then, we suppose that Judas went out (v. 30) to get his men ready that were to apprehend the Lord Jesus in the garden.
It is generally recognized by commentators that John 13:1 is the Passover meal.
Matthew Henry then goes on to say...
But Dr. Lightfoot is clearly of opinion that this was done and said, even all that is recorded to the end of ch. 14, not at the passover supper, for it is here said (v. 1) to be before the feast of the passover, but at the supper in Bethany, two days before the passover (of which we read Mt. 26:2-6), at which Mary the second time anointed Christ's head with the remainder of her box of ointment. Or, it might be at some other supper the night before the passover, not as that was in the house of Simon the leper, but in his own lodgings, where he had none but his disciples about him, and could be more free with them.
Dr. Lightfoot was wrong. As I have pointed out in post #59 as well as post #33, John states in John 13:21-27 that at this meal (the same meal mentioned in John 13:1), Jesus said that He would be betrayed by the one for whom He would dip the morsel and give it him.
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 26:21-24; Mark 14:18-21; Luke 22:21-22; John 13:21-27). Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper at the Passover meal (Matthew 26:20-29)
That mention of His betrayal by Judas proves all by itself that John chapters 13 through John chapter 17 is the Passover meal.
There is more. As I have stated, John gives many details about the events which took place at the Passover meal that the other Gospels don't. As well, the other three Gospels provide details about the Passover meal that John doesn't. And therefore, all four Gospels complement each other and provide a complete description of the events which occurred at that meal.
All of what takes place between John 13:2 and John chapter 18 takes place at the Passover meal. And then in John 18:1, after the Passover meal has concluded, Jesus takes His disciples and goes over the valley of Kidron, where there is a garden. The name of that garden is mentioned in the synoptic Gospels as the garden of Gethsemane. It is there that Jesus is betrayed by Judas and arrested.
John 18:1 When Jesus had spoken these words (everything mentioned beginning with John chapter 13 through the end of John chapter 17), He went forth with His disciples over the ravine of the Kidron, where there was a garden (Gethsemane), into which He Himself entered, and His disciples. 2] Now Judas also, who was betraying Him, knew the place; for Jesus had often met there with His disciples. 3] 'Judas then, having received the Roman cohort, and officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, came there with lanterns and torches and weapons. 4] Jesus therefore, knowing all the things that were coming upon Him, went forth, and said to them, ''Whom do you seek?''
It just takes a little bit of careful reading starting with John chapter 13 and continuing through chapter 18 to understand that John is referring to the Passover meal.
What Matthew covers in one chapter - chapter 26, starting with the Passover meal in verse 20, and going through the betrayal and arrest of Jesus, and Peter's denials of Jesus, John takes six chapters (chapters 13-18) to tell because of the greater detail he goes into.
>>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
aicent warrior, this is what I've come to believe also.
The whole so called doctrinal-premiss of Christ
being crucified on passover is to make Him the New 'passover lamb'.
When Christ did not come to re-new God's Covenants.
He came to give "A Better Covenant" "The New Covenant".
We don't have a new birth.
As if a birthing of the new, from the old.
We have another birth.
We are 'born again' not born-a-new.
Christ is not the new 'passover lamb'.
He's 'The Lamb 0f God' not of a re-newed covenant.
But of, "A Better Covenant". Another Covenant.
Not a re-newed covenant. But "The New Covenant'.
The old one is fading away. Not being re-newed.
"Christ is our passover'. Not 'the passover of the jews'.
Jesus told His disciples,
He was eager to eat "THIS passover" with them.
And after He said 'THIS Passover' ?
He THEN gave them The Bread & The Wine of "The New Covenant".
As OFTEN as you do THIS do it in remembrance of Me.
- Not when you keep 'the passover of the jews' once a year.
- Not in remembering when God brought Israel out of Egypt.
Teaching this false-doctrine by such messianic myths
of Christ being 'the passover lamb'
was only meant to take us back into 'the passover of the jews'.
We must remember we are not The Body 0f Jesus, The Jew.
We are "The Body 0f Christ".
The Word Messiah-Christ doesn't mean being an anointed Jew.
The Word Messiah-Christ means being Anointed 0f God.
Christ being 'the passover lamb'
puts everyone under The Re-Newed Law.
Of Jesus being a Jew for you.
Christ came to be The Son 0f God for you.
To show you the way to The Father.
Not show you the way of being a Jew to God.
Mike - try some modern sources (not from the 1600s). Our knowledge of Hebrew, Greek and the worlds in which these were spoken has grown vastly. This is the reason why the King James Version is no longer an accurate translation, for example. It's a beautiful translation, but it is severly lacking in many areas.
Your quoted commentary, in addition to being extremely outdated and innacurate, is extremely biased! Anti-semitic references, charges of blasphemy, etc... Sorry - John Gill is no longer an up-to-date authority on the subject. When you quote him - that just means you have to reach that far back for scholars who believed such an antiquated thing. Welcome to the 20th century.
What is clear here is that you disagree with the vast majority of biblical scholars, experts trained in their field. You disagree with them by quoting 500 year old commentaries, and cherrypicking definitions here and there from the internet. It doesn't really matter, though. You obviously have an obligation to preserving some idea of the "harmony" of the Gospels - a man-made construct that the Gospels never claim for themselves. Does that sound like a sound way of approaching a subject? By assuming something to be so, and then arguing vociferously against everyone who points out the folly of this?
Are you really claiming that the majority of Biblical Scholars are WRONG, and that you and John Gills are CORRECT? Really?
Yes. It's important that one realize that he/she isn't reading actual history, but legends written long after the events they describe.
Excerpted from A Concise History of the Catholic Church, By Father Thomas Bokenkotter, SS
"Words, for instance, were put in the mouth of Jesus and stories were told about him which, though not historical in the strict sense, nevertheless, in the minds of the evangelists, fittingly expressed the real meaning and intent of Jesus as faith had come to perceive him. For this reason, scholars have come to make a distinction between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith."
What difference does all this make on how you live your life?
My purpose is to defend the word of God against the attacks lodged against it. The attacks by both liberal and secular scholars and others on the Bible serve to undermine the faith of those whose faith is weak.
My purpose in this thread is to show that the Gospel of John does not contradict the other Gospels, but rather, compliments them.
For reference purposes, my major posts on this thread are post #1, 10, 21, 33, 38, 40, 49, 59, 60, and 64.
My purpose is to defend the word of God against the attacks lodged against it. The attacks by both liberal and secular scholars and others on the Bible serve to undermine the faith of those whose faith is weak.
My purpose in this thread is to show that the Gospel of John does not contradict the other Gospels, but rather, compliments them.
For reference purposes, my major posts on this thread are post #1, 10, 21, 33, 38, 40, 49, 59, 60, and 64.
I do hope that people will read them carefully.
RESPONSE:
>>My purpose is to defend the word of God against the attacks lodged against it<<
Or might it be that your purpose is to defend your (mis)interprepation of the word of God to try to shore up your belief system?
>>I do hope that people will read them carefully.<<
I am sure that all readers are giving your posts the attention they deserve.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 02-23-2012 at 05:45 PM..
Reason: typo
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.
