The four Gospels agree that Jesus Christ was crucified on Passover (crucifixion, tradition)
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.
Matthew, Mark, and Luke claim that Jesus was crucified on Passover. John, on the other had, has Jesus being crucified on the day before the Passover. This is said to be the case since John wanted Jesus to be crucified when the sacrificial lambs ("Behold the Lamb of God") for the Passover were slaughtered.
John 19:14 Now it was the day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon. He said to the Jews, ‘Here is your King!’ 15They cried out, ‘Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him!’ Pilate asked them, ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but the emperor.’ 16Then he handed him over to them to be crucified (NRSV)
Note that in John there is no mention of a Passover Last Supper or Eucharist since Jesus was already dead.
And John's gospel is the only one that allows that Jesus was in the gave for three nights (as well as three days - Sign of Jonah).
However, apologists go to great leangth trying to prove that the four gospels agree that Jesus was crucified on Frfiday (as in Cliff 555' post above).
This thread stems from a previous conversation in another thread. Because I don't feel like typing out everything I wrote, I will just copy and paste it, and then continue from there.
POST 1
Well - we kind of ARE talking about conflicting information, whether they are simple scribal errors or differing details from each individual Gospel writer. While the vast majority of scribal or Gospel errors/differences really have no bearing on major theological issues, there are some errors/differences that DO have a bearing on major theological issues.
One very important discrepancy that affects theological meaning is the date of Jesus' death, of which both Mark and John give explicit indications of when this death occured, but both are contradictory. Now - how does this affect theology? Well, it definately affects the theology that Jesus was the Passover Lamb. On the day before passover, the lamb is traditionally slaughtered and prepared to be consumed on the next day: Passover. Keep in mind that a jewish day begins at nightfall.
In Mark - Jesus celebrates Passover (the day after the preparation of the lamb - "The Day of Preparation") at the Last Supper (after nightfall), goes to the Garden, is arrested and is then executed on the same Jewish day (early morning for non-jews). He dies on the same day as Passover. (Mark 15:25)
In John - there is a meal, but there is no indication that it is the Passover meal, Jesus is condemned to death on the day before Passover, "it was the Day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon" (John 19:14). Jesus is then executed a short time later after noon (still the Jewish "Day of Preparation" [for the Passover]).
Now, there have been various ways that people have tried to reconcile the two accounts - but an honest reading shows that Jesus is said to have died on Passover Day (Mark), or on the Day of Preparation for the Passover (John). Most people will admit that Mark was the first gospel written, and that John was probably the last Gospel written. So why would this difference by important theologically?
Because in the Gospel of John, Jesus is the Lamb to atone for our sins, and according to Jewish custom the lamb that atones for the sins of Israel in the Passover holiday is slaughtered on the Day of Preparation for the Passover- it is eaten on the next day. It serves a definite theological point for John to move the date of Jesus' execution back one day to make a correspondence with the lamb traditionally slaughtered. It makes perfect sense, given John's theology! But not Mark's - who was not interested in proposing that Jesus was the sacrifical lamb to atone for our sins.
Now - I would say that this particular difference (which is not scribal, but part of each Gospel writer's story) does have a very important bearing on theology. It DOES matter what day Jesus was executed, IF one believes that Jesus Christ served as the sacrificial lamb to atone for our sins. If that isn't important, than Mark's account is fine - and one may attempt to explain away John's account. Or vice-versa, if it IS important. Either way - this is a definate example where both differing details AND a different emphasis have a very important bearing on how we understand the Gospel message, and how the Gospel writers themselves understood the message they were writing down. Don't you agree, in this instance?
POST 2
First of all - it is clearly stated that Jesus enjoys the Last Supper on the Day of Passover, for that is when it is eaten. Now - for the moment - forget Mark 15:42, and just read the account preceding it:
On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb is sacrificed [The Day of Preparation for the Passover], his disciples said to him, "Where do you want us to go and make the preparations for you to eat the Passover?"
(Mark 14:12-12, NRSV)
[Jesus tells them where, and the Disciples then go make the preparations, the lamb is sacrificed on the Day of the Preparation for the Passover - as is normal. Shortly later, at the start of the new Jewish Day, Passover occurs - when the meal is held....]
When it was evening, he came with the twelve. And when they had taken their places and were eating, Jesus said, "Truly I tell you, one of you shall betray me, one who is eating with me."
(Mark 14:17-18, ibid)
[The meal continues, and Jesus gives new meaning to the symbolism of the Passover Meal. The meal concludes with the Passover Hymn, which is from Psalms 114, 115 and 118. They then go to the Mount of Olives, then to Gethsemane, where Jesus is betrayed. He is taken "to the hight priest", Peter denies him, and morning comes - STILL on Passover Day, technically.]
As soon as it was morning, the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council. They bound Jesus, led him away, and handed him over to Pilate.
(Mark 15:1-2)
[Jesus is on trial before Pilate, and mention is made that "at the festival he (Pilate) used to release a prisoner" - another mention of the Passover Festival, and that is was the Day of Passover. Further events ensue, Jesus is taken and executed. Immediately after that is says:]
It was nine o'clock in the morning when they crucified him.
(Mark 15:25)
[Still on Passover Day, he was hung up at nine in the morning, but did not die yet.]
When it was noon, darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon. At three o'clock Jesus cried out with a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"....
Then Jesus gave a loud cry and breathed his last.
(Mark 15: 33-34, 37)
[NOW we get to your troublesome passage, - The Day of Preparation for the Sabbath, which is entirely different from the Day of Preparation for the Passover.]
When evening had come, and since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also himself waiting expectantly for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.
(Mark 15:42-43)
[A short verse later, further proof that vs. 42 refers to The Day of Preparation for the Sabbath is given:]
When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him.
(Mark 16:1)
So - as can be plainly seen - Jesus was crucified on the Passover in the Gospel of Mark. If you use 15:42 to call into question the myriad evidences to the contrary in the same Gospel, it is only because the translation you are using is faulty - NOT because the author of the Gospel did not know what day Jesus died upon. According to Mark - it was on Passover Day. IF you still insist that 15:42 says otherwise, then you are ignoring the other passages I quoted above.
The author of the Gospel of John sees it differently. Oh well. John had a theological point to make concerning the Lamb being sacrificed on the Day of Preparation for the Passover, while Mark did not have that same point to make about Jesus being the Lamb. This is why many say that John's Gospel is much more theologically sophisticated than Mark's.
First off - a hint to the problem between Mark's account and John's account of the day of Jesus' death can be approached by first understanding why we call the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke the Synoptic Gospels. Wikipedia states that they are grouped together because "they include many of the same stories, often in the same sequence, and sometimes exactly the same wording". The Gospel of John, on the other hand, is not Synoptic because it differs vastly from the Synoptic Gospels - there have been literally tons of books devoted to the differences between John and the Synoptics. So this is not some new radical, unproven theory: this is a time-attested, verifiable accepted view of the Gospels. It's not open to question, for the facts are plainly adduced by an open-minded reading of the material. Harmonizing John with the Synoptics has always resulted in an abysmal failure. Some may disagree, but their protestations run straight into the brick wall of scholarly investigation, backed up by the actual contents of the text itself.
Some General Johanine Differences
Raymond E. Brown, one of the most influential and respected New Testament scholars of the last century, author of numerous books and articles, and the very well-regarded commentary on the Gospel of John in the Anchor Bible Series, writes in An Introduction to the New Testament,
A comparison of the Fourth Gospel to the first three Gospels shows obvious differences. Peculiarities of John include: a Jesus conscious of having preexisted with God before he came into the world (John 17:5); a public ministry largely set in Jerusalem rather than in Galilee; the significant absence of the Kingdom of God motif (only in 3:3,5); long discourses and dialogues rather than parables; no diabolic possessions; a very restricted number of miracles (seven?), including some that are unique (changing of water to wine at Cana, healing a man born blind, and the raising of Lazarus).
According to statistics supplied by B. de Solages in a French study (1979) there are parallels to Mark in 15.5 percent of John's passion narrative; the parallels to Mark in the Matthean and Lucan passion narratives would be four times higher.
(pp. 364-365, New York: Doubleday, 1997)
If Raymond Brown isn't an acceptable authority to such observations - then I don't know who is, quite frankly. Anyways, these things can be investigated on one's own, naturally.
What day did Jesus die on?
In addition to the information provided in my previous post, the Gospel speaks for itself. AncientWarrior sums it up nicely in his post in this thread, which I will quote now:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient warrior
Matthew, Mark, and Luke claim that Jesus was crucified on Passover. John, on the other had, has Jesus being crucified on the day before the Passover. This is said to be the case since John wanted Jesus to be crucified when the sacrificial lambs ("Behold the Lamb of God") for the Passover were slaughtered.
John 19:14 Now it was the day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon. He said to the Jews, ‘Here is your King!’ 15They cried out, ‘Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him!’ Pilate asked them, ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but the emperor.’ 16Then he handed him over to them to be crucified (NRSV)
Note that in John there is no mention of a Passover Last Supper or Eucharist since Jesus was already dead.
And John's gospel is the only one that allows that Jesus was in the gave for three nights (as well as three days - Sign of Jonah).
However, apologists go to great leangth trying to prove that the four gospels agree that Jesus was crucified on Frfiday (as in Cliff 555' post above).
This is very good information, and the only way to argue against it is to do so apologetically and confuse the matter. It's very simple, as I and AW have pointed out: John wanted direct parallels between Jesus and the Lamb sacrificed on the Day before Passover (notice the "wine" that comes from Jesus' side, and the reference to his unbroken bones - just like the lamb sacrificed before Passover), besides being a theological statement that Jesus WAS the Lamb - the lamb sacrificed on the Day BEFORE Passover. This is crucial to Johanine theology and props it up immensely - that is why John differs from the Synoptic Gospels. As we've seen in the beginining of this post, John differs from the Synoptics in some major areas.
John 19:14
(Remember, it was the Day of Preparation for Passover, and the hour was about noon.)
(John 19:14, AB)
A clear reference to the Day that Jesus is executed on in the Gospel of John. Brown's textual note to this verse has this to say:
Day of Preparation:
This is the sense of the Greek word paraskeue, although the Semitic word that is probably represents (Hebrew 'ereb; Aramaic 'aruba) has the narrower connotation of "vigil, day before." The term, which appears in all the Gospels, was associated in the tradition with the day on which Jesus died. It was applicable to Friday, the day before the Sabbath (Josephus Ant. XVI.VI.2.#163), and this is the way in which the Synoptics understood it (Mark 15:42; Matthew 27:62; Luke 23:54). But for John this is not only the day before Sabbath but also the day before Passover, and John's "Day of Preparation for Passover" reflects the Hebrew expression ‘ereb pesaḥ (StB, II, 834ff.). Torrey's theory (JBL 50 [1931], 227-41) that Passover should be understood as the festival period of seven days and that John is speaking of Friday within Passover week has been refuted by S. Zeitlin, JBL 51 (1932), 263-71.
Noon:
....Only Mark fixes the crucifixion at 9 A.M.
....John's reference to noon has theological significance.
....The hour of noon on the Preparation Day for the Passover was the hour for beginning the slaughter of the paschal lambs. The ancient law of Exodus 12:6 required that the paschal lamb be kept alive until the 14th of Nisan and then slaughtered in the evening (literally, "between the two evenings", a phrase sometimes interpreted as meaning between sunset and darkness). By Jesus' time the slaughtering was no longer done at home by the heads of the families but in the temple precincts by the priests. A great number of lambs had to be slaughtered for the more than 100,000 Passover participants in Jerusalem and so the slaughering could no longer be done in the evening, in the technical sense of after sunset. By casuistry "evening" was interpreted to begin at noon when the sun began to decline, and thus the priests had the whole afternoon of the 14th to accomplish their task.
....The parenthetical Johanine reference to noon [here in this verse, 19:14] is probably meant to indicate the time for the whole action described in vss. 13-16, including the death sentence.
(AB, The Gospel of John, V. II, pp. 882-883, n. to 19:14, New York: Doubleday, 1966)
Forgive the long reference, but it's apparantly needed to clarify this very simple fact that John's Jesus dies on the Day of Preparation for the Passover, as opposed to the Gospel of Mark. I highly reccomend this commentary by Brown - it is widely held to be the finest ever written. As you can see from a very small selection above, it is filled to the brim with helpful, accurate information.
Conclusion - in opposition to the Thread's Assertion
The Bible clearly shows two different days for Jesus' death, and John's decision to choose the Day of Preparation for the Passover has theological implications that have forever informed Christianity ever since. Robbing this Gospel of it's original voice does a great disservice to the uniqueness of his message, and his personal understanding of what Christ's death meant.
"The author of the Gospel of John sees it differently. Oh well. John had a theological point to make concerning the Lamb being sacrificed on the Day of Preparation for the Passover, while Mark did not have that same point to make about Jesus being the Lamb. This is why many say that John's Gospel is much more theologically sophisticated than Mark's."
RESPONSE:
Which version is in error and hence not divinely inspired? Are we talking about history here or allegory?
This thread stems from a previous conversation in another thread. Because I don't feel like typing out everything I wrote, I will just copy and paste it, and then continue from there.
POST 1
Well - we kind of ARE talking about conflicting information, whether they are simple scribal errors or differing details from each individual Gospel writer. While the vast majority of scribal or Gospel errors/differences really have no bearing on major theological issues, there are some errors/differences that DO have a bearing on major theological issues.
One very important discrepancy that affects theological meaning is the date of Jesus' death, of which both Mark and John give explicit indications of when this death occured, but both are contradictory. Now - how does this affect theology? Well, it definately affects the theology that Jesus was the Passover Lamb. On the day before passover, the lamb is traditionally slaughtered and prepared to be consumed on the next day: Passover. Keep in mind that a jewish day begins at nightfall.
In Mark - Jesus celebrates Passover (the day after the preparation of the lamb - "The Day of Preparation") at the Last Supper (after nightfall), goes to the Garden, is arrested and is then executed on the same Jewish day (early morning for non-jews). He dies on the same day as Passover. (Mark 15:25)
In John - there is a meal, but there is no indication that it is the Passover meal, Jesus is condemned to death on the day before Passover, "it was the Day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon" (John 19:14). Jesus is then executed a short time later after noon (still the Jewish "Day of Preparation" [for the Passover]).
Now, there have been various ways that people have tried to reconcile the two accounts - but an honest reading shows that Jesus is said to have died on Passover Day (Mark), or on the Day of Preparation for the Passover (John). Most people will admit that Mark was the first gospel written, and that John was probably the last Gospel written. So why would this difference by important theologically?
Because in the Gospel of John, Jesus is the Lamb to atone for our sins, and according to Jewish custom the lamb that atones for the sins of Israel in the Passover holiday is slaughtered on the Day of Preparation for the Passover- it is eaten on the next day. It serves a definite theological point for John to move the date of Jesus' execution back one day to make a correspondence with the lamb traditionally slaughtered. It makes perfect sense, given John's theology! But not Mark's - who was not interested in proposing that Jesus was the sacrifical lamb to atone for our sins.
Now - I would say that this particular difference (which is not scribal, but part of each Gospel writer's story) does have a very important bearing on theology. It DOES matter what day Jesus was executed, IF one believes that Jesus Christ served as the sacrificial lamb to atone for our sins. If that isn't important, than Mark's account is fine - and one may attempt to explain away John's account. Or vice-versa, if it IS important. Either way - this is a definate example where both differing details AND a different emphasis have a very important bearing on how we understand the Gospel message, and how the Gospel writers themselves understood the message they were writing down. Don't you agree, in this instance?
POST 2
First of all - it is clearly stated that Jesus enjoys the Last Supper on the Day of Passover, for that is when it is eaten. Now - for the moment - forget Mark 15:42, and just read the account preceding it:
On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb is sacrificed [The Day of Preparation for the Passover], his disciples said to him, "Where do you want us to go and make the preparations for you to eat the Passover?"
(Mark 14:12-12, NRSV)
[Jesus tells them where, and the Disciples then go make the preparations, the lamb is sacrificed on the Day of the Preparation for the Passover - as is normal. Shortly later, at the start of the new Jewish Day, Passover occurs - when the meal is held....]
When it was evening, he came with the twelve. And when they had taken their places and were eating, Jesus said, "Truly I tell you, one of you shall betray me, one who is eating with me."
(Mark 14:17-18, ibid)
[The meal continues, and Jesus gives new meaning to the symbolism of the Passover Meal. The meal concludes with the Passover Hymn, which is from Psalms 114, 115 and 118. They then go to the Mount of Olives, then to Gethsemane, where Jesus is betrayed. He is taken "to the hight priest", Peter denies him, and morning comes - STILL on Passover Day, technically.]
As soon as it was morning, the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council. They bound Jesus, led him away, and handed him over to Pilate.
(Mark 15:1-2)
[Jesus is on trial before Pilate, and mention is made that "at the festival he (Pilate) used to release a prisoner" - another mention of the Passover Festival, and that is was the Day of Passover. Further events ensue, Jesus is taken and executed. Immediately after that is says:]
It was nine o'clock in the morning when they crucified him.
(Mark 15:25)
[Still on Passover Day, he was hung up at nine in the morning, but did not die yet.]
When it was noon, darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon. At three o'clock Jesus cried out with a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"....
Then Jesus gave a loud cry and breathed his last.
(Mark 15: 33-34, 37)
[NOW we get to your troublesome passage, - The Day of Preparation for the Sabbath, which is entirely different from the Day of Preparation for the Passover.]
When evening had come, and since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also himself waiting expectantly for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.
(Mark 15:42-43)
[A short verse later, further proof that vs. 42 refers to The Day of Preparation for the Sabbath is given:]
When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him.
(Mark 16:1)
So - as can be plainly seen - Jesus was crucified on the Passover in the Gospel of Mark. If you use 15:42 to call into question the myriad evidences to the contrary in the same Gospel, it is only because the translation you are using is faulty - NOT because the author of the Gospel did not know what day Jesus died upon. According to Mark - it was on Passover Day. IF you still insist that 15:42 says otherwise, then you are ignoring the other passages I quoted above.
The author of the Gospel of John sees it differently. Oh well. John had a theological point to make concerning the Lamb being sacrificed on the Day of Preparation for the Passover, while Mark did not have that same point to make about Jesus being the Lamb. This is why many say that John's Gospel is much more theologically sophisticated than Mark's.
END OF PREVIOUS POSTS
It's already been established that John shows that Jesus was crucified on Passover day.
When referring to Passover the reference could be either to Passover day itself - Nisan 14, or it could refer to Passover Week - the Feast of Unleavened bread from Nisan 15 to Nisan 21. My first post contains many scriptural referrences to this.
John's reference in John 19:14 was to Passover week. Not to Passover day. I better clarify that. John was not saying that it was the day of preparation prior to Nisan 14, the day on which Jesus was crucified, but rather that it was Passover day which itself was the day of preparation for the Passover week which was the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
'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!''
The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty, p.339, regarding John 19:14-16 states the following:
'19:14-16. The sixth hour, by Roman reckoning of time, could indicate 6 A.M. (some scholars, however, take it to mean noon; cf. comments on 1:39; 4:6). This was the day of preparation for the Passover Week (i.e., Friday). That day was the Passover proper, the day on which Christ died. But it was also the preparation for the seven-day Feast of Unleavened Bread, which followed immediately ater the Day of Passover, and which was sometimes called the Passover Week (cf. Luke 2:41; 22:1, 7; Acts 12: 3-4; see comments on Luke 22:7-38).'
Now, I disagree with the belief that Jesus was crucified on Friday, but the statement that John's reference was to Passover Week rather then Passover day - Nisan 14 is correct. And the reference is to 6 A.M.
Biblical scholar, and theologian John Gill (1697–1771) concerning John 19:14 agrees.
And it was the preparation of the passover,.... So the Jews (x) say, that Jesus suffered on the eve of the passover; and the author of the blasphemous account of his life says (y), it was the eve both of the passover and the sabbath; which account so far agrees with the evangelic history; but then this preparation of the passover was not of the passover lamb, for that had been prepared and eaten the night before. Nor do I find that there was any particular day which was called "the preparation of the passover" in such sense, and much less that this day was the day before the eating of the passover. According to the law in Exodus 12:3 the lamb for the passover was to be separated from the rest of the flock on the tenth day of the month, and to be kept up till the fourteenth; but this is never called the preparation of the passover; and was it so called, it cannot be intended here; the preparing and making ready the passover the evangelists speak of, were on the same day it was eaten, and design the getting ready a place to eat it in, and things convenient for that purpose, and the killing the lamb, and dressing it, and the like, Matthew 26:17 there is what the Jews call , which was a space of fifteen days before the passover, and began at the middle of the thirty days before the feast, in which they used to ask questions, and explain the traditions concerning the passover (z): but this is never called the preparation of the passover: and on the night of the fourteenth month they sought diligently, in every hole and corner of their houses, for leavened bread, in order to remove it (a); but this also never went by any such name: wherefore, if any respect is had to the preparation for the passover, it must either design the preparation of the "Chagigah", which was a grand festival, commonly kept on the fifteenth day, and which was sometimes called the passover; or else the preparation for the whole feast all the remaining days of it; See Gill on John 18:28 but it seems best of all to understand it only of the preparation for the sabbath, which, because it was in the passover week, is called the passover preparation day: and it may be observed, that it is sometimes only called "the day of the preparation", and "the preparation", Matthew 27:62 and sometimes the "Jews' preparation day", John 19:42 and it is explained by the Evangelist Mark 15:42. "It was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath"; on which they both prepared themselves for the sabbath, and food to eat on that day; and this being the time of the passover likewise, the preparation was the greater: and therefore to distinguish this preparation day for the sabbath, from others, it is called the passover preparation; nor have I observed that any other day is called the preparation but that before the sabbath: the Jews dispute about preparing food for the sabbath on a feast day, as this was; they seem to forbid it, but afterwards soften their words, and allow it with some provisos: their canon runs thus (b); John 19:14 Bible Commentary
The Greek word for Passover is pascha and is used in three different ways in the Bible.
Sometimes pascha stands for the Passover sacrifice, the lamb itself (Mk. 14:12; Lk. 22:7; 1 Cor. 5:7).
Also pascha can refer to the meal that was eaten on the 14th of Nisan, the first month of the Hebrew calendar (Mt. 26:18-19; Lk. 22:8, 13; Heb. 11:28).
But also pascha can refer to the entire eight-day period which included the feast of unleavened bread — thus from the 14th of Nisan which is Passover day proper, to the 21st of Nisan which is the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, you shall observe the Passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten" (Ezek: 45:21; cf. Lk. 22:1, 7; Acts 12:3-4).
In John 19:14, John is saying that it was Passover day proper, the day on which Jesus Christ was crucified, the day of preparation for the Passover week which was the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
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!''
This should be absolutely clear. The gospel of John is in full agreement with the other three gospels on the day of Jesus' crucifixion. Passover - Nisan 14.
Last edited by Michael Way; 02-20-2012 at 02:04 PM..
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?
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.
