• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

When did Jesus die?

L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
I have above my desk a quotation from Deuteronomy 32:4. It reads, 'He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.'

I diligently search for understanding, believing the Word of God to be TRUTH!

Which leads me on to the bit about the spices and the women at the tomb! The women in Mark 16:1 bought (purchased) sweet spices and then (v.2) went to the tomb. There is no mention of rest on the sabbath.
Luke 23:56 mentions the return of the women from laying the body in the tomb, followed by preparation of spices and ointments. Then they rested for the sabbath. Nothing is said about purchasing spices, only preparing what they already had. Luke 24:1 says that when they turned up at the tomb after the sabbath they had both the prepared spices and 'certain others with them' i.e. those purchased AFTER the sabbath.
It may have been that the preparation of certain spices took place before the sabbath and the purchase of more spices took place after the sabbath.
Click to expand...
I certainly respect your efforts in searching for the truth. The very first words in Mark 16:1 say ""And when the sabbath was past" This seems to support the idea that Friday was a day between two sabbaths. They bought spices AFTER the sabbath on Thursday for the beginning of the unleavened bread holy day. They prepared the spices the same day they bought them ( Friday ). Then they rested on the Saturday sabbath and went to the tomb Sunday morning.I hope you will continue to search for the truth with anopen mind. And I hope we can both be better people because of this discussion. I just can't accept that Friday evening to Sunday is three days and three nights. And remember that Jesus said that this would be the ONLY proof that He was the Son of God. I really do not want to call him a liar. Best wishes.
 
Muffled

Muffled

Jesus in me
SalixIncendium said:
If we are looking for “proof” of when Jesus died, shouldn’t we first have “proof” he existed to begin with? Without this, any argument of when he died is mere speculation and conjecture.

I offered no “proof” in my initial (or subsequent) response, nor was it my intent to imply that I had any. I merely replied with what is generally accepted in Christianity.
Click to expand...

I believe I can't prove who my ancestor was in England because the records were burned in a church fire but I am sure I had one or I wouldn't be alive today.
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
I certainly respect your efforts in searching for the truth. The very first words in Mark 16:1 say ""And when the sabbath was past" This seems to support the idea that Friday was a day between two sabbaths. They bought spices AFTER the sabbath on Thursday for the beginning of the unleavened bread holy day. They prepared the spices the same day they bought them ( Friday ). Then they rested on the Saturday sabbath and went to the tomb Sunday morning.I hope you will continue to search for the truth with anopen mind. And I hope we can both be better people because of this discussion. I just can't accept that Friday evening to Sunday is three days and three nights. And remember that Jesus said that this would be the ONLY proof that He was the Son of God. I really do not want to call him a liar. Best wishes.
Click to expand...

Hi. I agree that we must take the Jonah prophecy as a literal 'three days and nights'. But I wonder whether the days and nights have to be whole 12 hour segments of time, or whether, as some commentators suggest, it's OK to take part days and nights to count as a whole. If we go by the purist view and only accept whole days and nights, and also accept that the women arrived at the empty tomb early on the first day of the week (Sunday), then we must go back to Wednesday for the crucifixion. I'm in full agreement with this understanding of the evidence. It also fits with the Jewish mathematical calculation that excludes Monday, Wednesday and Friday as the first day of Passover (the 15th Nisan).
The Jewish and Gentile day clocks don't match, but the rough equivalent would look something like this:
Tuesday - 13 Nisan (Last Supper)
Wednesday - 14 Nisan (Crucifixion and, in evening, Jewish Seder) [Jonah - 1 night]
Thursday - 15 Nisan (Holy Convocation or sabbath) [Jonah - 2 nights, 1 day]
Friday - 16 Nisan [Jonah - 3 nights, 2 days]
Saturday - 17 Nisan (weekly sabbath) [Jonah 3 nights, 3 days] [resurrection at night]
Sunday - 18 Nisan (tomb empty)

If we are to take all possibilities into account, then there is a chance that the preparation of spices took place on Wednesday, immediately after the entombment of the body of Jesus. Other spices could then have been purchased on either Friday, or after 6pm on Saturday. Either way, the text seems to indicate that some spices were prepared, before others were purchased. And, most importantly, there is no contradiction in the text!

Scriptures that do add some confusion are Matthew 26:17, and parallel passages in the synoptic gospels, where it says, 'Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?'

The wording here, taken from the KJV, seems to indicate that the Last Supper was held on the first day of the feast of Unleavened Bread, which would then have been a sabbath day.

I do have an idea how this difficulty might be addressed, but what do you think?
 
Wandering Monk

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
Another consideration: Jewish reckoning put the beginning of the day after sunset. So 'early on the first of the week' could have been anytime after sundown Saturday.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Wandering Monk said:
Another consideration: Jewish reckoning put the beginning of the day after sunset. So 'early on the first of the week' could have been anytime after sundown Saturday.
Click to expand...
Very interesting point. I am so glad a few people like you are willing to explore this idea instead of just repeating what the major churches teach.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
Hi. I agree that we must take the Jonah prophecy as a literal 'three days and nights'. But I wonder whether the days and nights have to be whole 12 hour segments of time, or whether, as some commentators suggest, it's OK to take part days and nights to count as a whole. If we go by the purist view and only accept whole days and nights, and also accept that the women arrived at the empty tomb early on the first day of the week (Sunday), then we must go back to Wednesday for the crucifixion. I'm in full agreement with this understanding of the evidence. It also fits with the Jewish mathematical calculation that excludes Monday, Wednesday and Friday as the first day of Passover (the 15th Nisan).
The Jewish and Gentile day clocks don't match, but the rough equivalent would look something like this:
Tuesday - 13 Nisan (Last Supper)
Wednesday - 14 Nisan (Crucifixion and, in evening, Jewish Seder) [Jonah - 1 night]
Thursday - 15 Nisan (Holy Convocation or sabbath) [Jonah - 2 nights, 1 day]
Friday - 16 Nisan [Jonah - 3 nights, 2 days]
Saturday - 17 Nisan (weekly sabbath) [Jonah 3 nights, 3 days] [resurrection at night]
Sunday - 18 Nisan (tomb empty)

If we are to take all possibilities into account, then there is a chance that the preparation of spices took place on Wednesday, immediately after the entombment of the body of Jesus. Other spices could then have been purchased on either Friday, or after 6pm on Saturday. Either way, the text seems to indicate that some spices were prepared, before others were purchased. And, most importantly, there is no contradiction in the text!

Scriptures that do add some confusion are Matthew 26:17, and parallel passages in the synoptic gospels, where it says, 'Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?'

The wording here, taken from the KJV, seems to indicate that the Last Supper was held on the first day of the feast of Unleavened Bread, which would then have been a sabbath day.

I do have an idea how this difficulty might be addressed, but what do you think?
Click to expand...
Very interesting point I did not notice before. What day did Jesus eat the "last supper"? It is usually eaten before the days of unleavened bread, I think. So more reading and study is needed. Thanks for pointing this out.
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
Very interesting point I did not notice before. What day did Jesus eat the "last supper"? It is usually eaten before the days of unleavened bread, I think. So more reading and study is needed. Thanks for pointing this out.
Click to expand...

If we pool all the information from all four Gospels, the overwhelming weight of material would suggest that Jesus ate the Last Supper on the 13th Nisan, in the evening. This actually means the 14th Nisan because the new day starts at sundown. Similarly, although Leviticus 23:5 says 'In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD'S passover', the rabbis have understood this to mean on the fifteenth day.

I find this fascinating because I begin to wonder whether the wording is not intentionally ambiguous. Maybe God wanted to create two days for the Passover Seder celebration in order that Jesus could fulfil the law both as a participant and as a sacrifice.

I say this because the next verse in Leviticus says, 'And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.'

We know, therefore, that unleavened bread had to be eaten from the fifteenth for seven days. But what about the 14th? You cannot have a Passover meal without eating unleavened bread! For this reason the 14th must also have been a day of unleavened bread, even if it was not part of the seven days of the feast.
Luke 22:7,8 says, 'Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.'
Luke 22:15, 'And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:'

Jesus clearly refers to his last supper as the passover. Luke also connects the killing of the passover with the day of unleavened bread [note: it does not say 'feast' of unleavened bread]
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
On this topic, Mark's Gospel provides an aside which is really interesting, and could be a mistake by the translators of the KJV.
[In the KJV the intalicised words indicate where translators have added words that are not in the originals.]

Mark 14:1,2. says, 'After two days was the feast of 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.
But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar of the people.'

Mark says that after two days was the passover and the day of unleavened bread [14 Nisan] - 'DAY' not 'FEAST'. The feast was after three days [15 Nisan]! The chief priests and scribes wanted to kill Jesus before the FEAST. That's why they sent soldiers to take him captive on the night preceding the feast [14 Nisan]!
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
If we pool all the information from all four Gospels, the overwhelming weight of material would suggest that Jesus ate the Last Supper on the 13th Nisan, in the evening. This actually means the 14th Nisan because the new day starts at sundown. Similarly, although Leviticus 23:5 says 'In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD'S passover', the rabbis have understood this to mean on the fifteenth day.

I find this fascinating because I begin to wonder whether the wording is not intentionally ambiguous. Maybe God wanted to create two days for the Passover Seder celebration in order that Jesus could fulfil the law both as a participant and as a sacrifice.

I say this because the next verse in Leviticus says, 'And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.'

We know, therefore, that unleavened bread had to be eaten from the fifteenth for seven days. But what about the 14th? You cannot have a Passover meal without eating unleavened bread! For this reason the 14th must also have been a day of unleavened bread, even if it was not part of the seven days of the feast.
Luke 22:7,8 says, 'Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.'
Luke 22:15, 'And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:'

Jesus clearly refers to his last supper as the passover. Luke also connects the killing of the passover with the day of unleavened bread [note: it does not say 'feast' of unleavened bread]
Click to expand...
You have obviously done a lot more research than I have. I will not ask about any religious affiliation you may have but it is so refreshing to find someone who does not simply repeat the teachings of the major religions. You would think some of them would want to study this idea and see what they can discover.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
On this topic, Mark's Gospel provides an aside which is really interesting, and could be a mistake by the translators of the KJV.
[In the KJV the intalicised words indicate where translators have added words that are not in the originals.]

Mark 14:1,2. says, 'After two days was the feast of 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.
But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar of the people.'

Mark says that after two days was the passover and the day of unleavened bread [14 Nisan] - 'DAY' not 'FEAST'. The feast was after three days [15 Nisan]! The chief priests and scribes wanted to kill Jesus before the FEAST. That's why they sent soldiers to take him captive on the night preceding the feast [14 Nisan]!
Click to expand...
Thanks for you insights on this subject. I continue to wonder why the major churches do not research this subject. Maybe they are afrais they might find something that goes against what they have taught for centuries.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
You have obviously done a lot more research than I have. I will not ask about any religious affiliation you may have but it is so refreshing to find someone who does not simply repeat the teachings of the major religions. You would think some of them would want to study this idea and see what they can discover.
Click to expand...
Let me offer one more idea for consideration. The Passover lambs were killes and prepared on the "day of preparation" and that evening the Passover meal is eaten Jesus is referred to as "the Lamb of God". What if Jesus was put to death on the same day that the lambs were killed? Wouldn't this make "lamb of God" much more meaningful? So how about this timeline. Jesus arrived in Jerusalem on Tuesday and ate His last meal that evening. The only question is if that was a Passover meal or not. Later He was arrested. The next day He was placed on the cross about the same time the lambs were being killed. (Wednesday). He was placed in the tomb before sunset because Thursday was the first day of unleavened bread. The women rested that day then bought and prepared spices Friday then rested again on Saturday. When they went to the tomb Sunday morning, it was empty. Three FULL days and three FULL nights had passed. I really feel like there is something here but I would like other opinions whether it makes sense.
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
Let me offer one more idea for consideration. The Passover lambs were killes and prepared on the "day of preparation" and that evening the Passover meal is eaten Jesus is referred to as "the Lamb of God". What if Jesus was put to death on the same day that the lambs were killed? Wouldn't this make "lamb of God" much more meaningful? So how about this timeline. Jesus arrived in Jerusalem on Tuesday and ate His last meal that evening. The only question is if that was a Passover meal or not. Later He was arrested. The next day He was placed on the cross about the same time the lambs were being killed. (Wednesday). He was placed in the tomb before sunset because Thursday was the first day of unleavened bread. The women rested that day then bought and prepared spices Friday then rested again on Saturday. When they went to the tomb Sunday morning, it was empty. Three FULL days and three FULL nights had passed. I really feel like there is something here but I would like other opinions whether it makes sense.
Click to expand...

I agree with you entirely as to the overall sequence. Jesus is most definitely killed at the same time as the lambs are killed for passover. This time period is referred to in Hebrew as 'between the two evenings' [See Exodus 12:6] and occurs on the preparation day, the 14 Nisan. It probably means sometime in the afternoon, though some think it means between 3pm and 6pm, or between twilight and darkness. The confusing thing about using pagan days of the week is that Wednesday continues through til 12pm, whereas the 15 Nisan starts at 6pm (darkness, or evening).
I agree that 15 Nisan was the beginning of the FEAST of unleavened bread, but it was not the first day of eating unleavened bread. If it was, how do you explain Luke 22:7? It would also mean that Jesus' Last Supper was not on a day of unleavened bread, and therefore not a passover meal.

It would certainly bring greater unity between Christians if it were agreed that the Word of God was the ultimate authority!
 
Last edited:
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
I agree with you entirely as to the overall sequence. Jesus is most definitely killed at the same time as the lambs are killed for passover. This time period is referred to in Hebrew as 'between the two evenings' [See Exodus 12:6] and occurs on the preparation day, the 14 Nisan. It probably means sometime in the afternoon, though some think it means between 3pm and 6pm, or between twilight and darkness. The confusing thing about using pagan days of the week is that Wednesday continues through til 12pm, whereas the 15 Nisan starts at 6pm (darkness, or evening).
I agree that 15 Nisan was the beginning of the FEAST of unleavened bread, but it was not the first day of eating unleavened bread. If it was, how do you explain Luke 22:7? It would also mean that Jesus' Last Supper was not on a day of unleavened bread, and therefore not a passover meal.

It would certainly bring greater unity between Christians if it were agreed that the Word of God was the ultimate authority!
Click to expand...
And unfortunate that the Bible can be difficult to understand. I certainly hope we can someday know and understand this and other questions. Til then we can only syudy and look for new insights.
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
And unfortunate that the Bible can be difficult to understand. I certainly hope we can someday know and understand this and other questions. Til then we can only syudy and look for new insights.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's a good thing that the Bible is hard to understand. Only those who ask, seek and knock, will uncover the truth. Others remain blind.
 
Wandering Monk

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
Then you place the word of the Pope, a sinner, above the Word of God!
Click to expand...

In your scenario, every believer (all sinners) read and interpret the Bible for themselves. Thus they establish their own 'tradition of men.' Look around you at the myriad interpretation even among Protestants. How does this facilitate the finding of truth and Christian unity better than what I proposed? Mind you, I am NOT Catholic.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
Maybe it's a good thing that the Bible is hard to understand. Only those who ask, seek and knock, will uncover the truth. Others remain blind.
Click to expand...
You are indeed a wise man. I am not sure there is much more to say on this subject right now but there is another thread called "Who will get to Heaven". I have not found scriptures that promise Heaven to anyone. Perhaps you would share some thoughts on that thread. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top