Christ died on Thursday and rose on Sunday

[John1one]

Greetings Asaph,
I hope you had a good weekend. Let's see where we are in our discussion: INCLUSIVE RECKONING Post 19:

Concerning the "three days and three nights" of Matthew 12:40 and the "after three days" of Matthew 27:68 and Mark 8:31 you said:

QUOTE ASAPH:

These verses are appealed to in order to propose a full 72 hours in the grave. They do seem to say a full 3 days and 3 nights don't they? How can this possibly be reconciled with the traditional chronology? If you believe the Bible cannot contradict itself, then these verses MUST be harmonized with the rest of scripture on the subject.

These Scriptures cannot be reconciled with traditional chronology - not without redefining them. While one can say that "three days and three nights" are THREE DAYS or their fulfillment can be referred to as the THIRD DAY, they cannot be referred to as "the day after tomorrow."

Yes, I do believe the Bible cannot contradict itself and therefore it is my (our) responsibility to read it in such a way that Scripture is harmonized without doing damage to what the words say. In other words, I MUST NOT redefine a phrase so it agrees with another phrase of Scripture. I must find out how they agree without imposing my own prejudices upon the Scripture.

QUOTE ASAPH

Well... please note the following story in 1 Kings-

1 Ki 12:5 And he said unto them, Depart yet *for three days*, then come again to me. And the people departed.

1 Ki 12:12 So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam *the third day*, as the king had appointed, saying, Come to me again *the third day*.

The king tells the people to depart for three days, but they return ON the third day, not on the fourth!! Why? Because the king did not mean to be gone for a full 72 hours. The counting of days was inclusive in nature. The same day that the king told them to leave was the first day. The second day they stayed away, and then they returned the third day, as the king had intended. This is the exactly the same manner of counting used for the resurrection. It is inclusive in nature, with whatever portion of the first and last days being counted as full days.

Just for good measure, this same story is told in 2 Chronicles-

2 Chr 10:5 And he said unto them, Come again unto me *after three days*. And the people departed.

2 Chr 10:12 So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam *on the third day*, as the king bade, saying, Come again to me *on the third day*.

Note the way this is worded compared to 1 Kings. Come again unto me after three days, depart yet for three days, and Come again to me on the third day, these all mean exactly the same thing, which is NOT a full three days or a full 72 hours.

There is nothing here said of "inclusive reckoning." Using our time frame for easy reference, the king could have said on Monday, "Depart from me for three days" or "Come to me 'after three days' " and if the people came to him on Thursday it would be just as the king requested. THERE IS NOTHING HERE THAT SAYS IT MEANS THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW!

QUOTE ASAPH

Luke 13:31 The same day there came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence: for Herod will kill thee.
Luke 13:32 And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.
Luke 13:33 Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.

Note that here in Luke 13, the third day clearly means the day after tomorrow, not after 3 full days. So, in light of all the evidence, Matt 12:40, 27:63 and Mark 8:31 do not really mean a full literal three days and nights or 72 hours, since Jesus clearly rose ON the third day. By Jewish understanding, referred to as inclusive reckoning, three days and three nights, and after three days, simply meant the same thing as ON the third day.

This is true, but how would you define "after 6 days" of Matthew 17:1 and Mark 9:2? Is it 4 days? Is it 5days? OR Is it just as it appears - 6 full 24 hour days?

The answer is: 6 full 24-hour days! There can be no question! How can I know that for sure? Well Luke 9:28 describes the same event saying "And it came to pass about an eight days after these sayings, he took Peter and John and James, and went up into a mountain to pray." Here Luke says ABOUT eight days. He is speaking of two actual partial days, but 6 full days. Matthew and Mark speak of only the WHOLE DAYS. Luke describes a time just before sunset being the 1st day, + 6 full days + a few hours after sunset and when the disciples were sleeping (the second partial day). WHERE IS THE INCLUSIVE RECKONING IN MATTHEW AND MARK?

How do you know for certain that inclusive reckoning MUST  be the defining principle concerning the time Jesus spent in the tomb? Throw out "tradition" and just use the Bible. If the tradition is true, the Bible with prove it. The Word of God should define tradition. TRADITION should NEVER define the Word of God!

MORE TO COME

[John1one]

Continued to asaph,
Concerning POST #24 and my coupling Mark 16:1 and Luke 23:56 saying that there must have been two Sabbaths and a day of business between them during Passover week that year, you said:

QUOTE ASAPH

You make a good point. To hold to my view I would have to speculate only. The Bible is silent on this. But let me speculate. Perhaps the women had relatives in Jerusalem or close connections with people that had all they needed. Therefore they didn't have to shop at all, but only wait for the sabbath to end. When the Sabbath did end they would have began immediately to prepare them.Another thing I would like to mention is that, if I am correct,  the 15th of Nisan landed on the 7th day Sabbath, making that day a special Sabbath; you might say a double Sabbath on the same day. A verse that I believe confirms this is John 19:31.John 1931  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,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.What made it an high day is the fact that the feast of unleavened bread began on that day. The passover was the day before on the 14th of Nisan. Then there's the 16th of Nisan, the day of Firstfruits, a clear type of the resurrection day, which occurs after a sabbath day, but is not itself a Sabbath day!

• Speculation: they acquired the spices etc. from friends or relatives in the area.
• The Word of God says in Mark 16:1 that Mary Magdalene, and Mary the Mother of James, and Salome - all three BOUGHT the spices AFTER THE SABBATH.

Concerning your thoughts about the "high day" mentioned in John 19:31 concerns the historical importance of the Passover Holy Day. The Greek word is megas (S.3173). It is used 195 times in the New Testament and is translated "great" 150 times; "loud" 33 times; and miscellaneous (which includes "high") only 12 times. It does not mean that there were two Sabbaths together, though that did occur from time to time. The Jews did not want the bodies hanging on the crosses, because it would have been an embarrassment to them as a nation. On the one hand they were celebrating becoming a nation, being brought out of slavery by their God and on the other hand Pilate wrote above the head of Jesus "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" in three languages. The Jews would have done almost anything to have the legs broken and removed from the hill.

As for the 16th of Nisan, it has no religious significance unless in the course of time the 15th of Nisan does land on the 7th day Sabbath. Then the 16th of Nisan is the First day of the Weeks; i.e. the first day of the count toward Pentecost or FEAST OF WEEKS in the Bible. BTW This is what all these Scriptures, regarding the testimony after the resurrection of Christ in the New Testament, are referring to. The clause "first day of the week" is only secondarily a reference to the 1st day of the week. Wave Sheaf was always offered (not on the 16th, but on the day after the 7th day Sabbath which fell in Passover Week. Using it we count to Pentecost - 50 days (see Leviticus 23).

MORE TO COME

[John1one]

Continued to asaph,
Concerning POST # 25 and my saying that the WAVE SHEAF Offering was harvested on the Sabbath, you asked:

QUOTE ASAPH

Wouldn't the Wave Sheaf Offering have to be harvested after the Sabbath to avoid breaking the Sabbath?

NOT NECESSARILY - All of what the priest did on the Sabbath, technically broke the Sabbath, but they were blameless as Christ said in Matthew 12:5  "Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?"

I thought I read in one of my Bible helps that the Wave Sheaf was cut in ceremonial fashion while the sun was still going down on the Sabbath, but I cannot find what I thought I read. I must, therefore, merely quote Matthew 12:5 concerning the priests profaning the Sabbath, and yet being blameless. I hope to prove the hour of Christ's resurrection, using additional Scripture elsewhere.

QUOTE ASAPH

Saturday then, if it is the resurrection day, should also be the day of Firstfruits. But this violates what is set forth in Lev. 23:11 which states that Firstfruits occurs the day after the sabbath, meaning the day after the 15 Nisan sabbath (1st day of Unleavened Bread, v.7). So, Firstfruits could not have been on Saturday, since it would clearly not be after a sabbath. So Saturday is clearly disqualified from being Firstfruits. Let me quote Lev. 23:1111  And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.

agree that the Wave Sheaf Offering represents ChristI. It was offered during the time of the morning Sacrifice (6AM) on the FIRST DAY OF THE WEEKS, which always landed on a Sunday (our time). It was the first day counting toward the FEAST OF WEEKS or our Pentecost. If it represented Christ's resurrection, then Christ would have risen at 6AM on the FIRST OF THE WEEKS at the very time of the offering, just as He died on the cross at the very time of the slaying of the PASSOVER LAMB. The Wave Sheaf Offering represents our heavenly Father formally ACCEPTING the sacrifice of Christ. Christ represents the harvest of men (Romans 16:11; 1Corinthinans 15:20-23). The harvest (SALVATION) cannot continue until the Wave Sheaf Offering is made and accepted by God.

It is my contention that Christ rose at the time of the harvesting of the bundles of barley grain that was used for the Wave Sheaf Offering, but I am unable at present to prove to you that the barley grain used by the priests was indeed harvested on the Sabbath. The Bible, itself, is silent on this matter, at least I have never found a verse that refers to the harvesting of the grain used in the offering of the Wave Sheaf.

QUOTE ASAPH

Does not the sheaf waved represent Christ in resurrection? And is it not waved the day after the sabbath? You are right when you say we do not know the time of His rising, but it has to be after the Sabbath. I do not have a problem with it being done in the dark, so I am not sure what your point was on that issue.

No, to your first question; yes, to your second question (as explained above). I believe that we DO KNOW the time of the resurrection. I believe it is between 5PM & 6PM on the 7th day Sabbath falling within the 8 day Passover Festival.

Concerning my point about the dark, I was using the word metaphorically. Neither would I mind if Christ rose at night. What I meant by "dark" is that we don't know  the hour of Christ's resurrection, if we hold to the traditional viewpoint. Yet, this is the most important event in Christian history. It seems to me, that God would have made that pretty clear somewhere in His Word. Everything else in Christ's life is detailed pretty well. Why shouldn't we know the hour of Christ's resurrection? It is only obscure if we adopt a Friday crucifixion.

MORE TO COME

P.S. Just to clarify: the Wave Sheaf does represent the resurrected Christ, but not the resurrection itself. The resurrected Christ was formally received by God in the Wave Sheaf offering. Our Heavenly Father formally accepted His sacrifice at that time.

[John1one]

Continued to asaph,
Concerning the clause “as it began to dawn” toward the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1) in POST #27, you said:

QUOTE ASAPH:

"As it began to dawn" Does not have to mean the sun was peeking over the hill. I do not think this is meant to be a precise phrase indicating an exact moment. It could mean any time prior to sunrise yet with time enough allowed for Jesus to rise after the Sabbath. In order to be the antitype of the wave sheaf offering, Jesus would have to rise on Sunday, the Day after the Sabbath. I was not there so I can't fill in the details. Only God Knows.

The same Greek word is used in Luke 23:54 “And that day was the preparation, and the Sabbath DREW ON.” The Greek word is epiphosko (S.2020). It means to “grow light” or “dawn” “drawn on” i.e. something begins or approaches. It is used in Luke 23:54 to indicate that the Sabbath was so close that Jesus had to be buried in a borrowed tomb (John 19:42). I do not believe Matthew 28:1 can be used to indicate “sunrise” or the “beginning of the light” part of the day for several reasons:

• First, because there was so much activity by the women and the disciples that took place before sunrise. Therefore, Matthew 28:1 “as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week” must indicated the end of the Sabbath (sunset) as the First Day of the Weeks was DRAWING ON (just like it is used in Luke 23:54).
• Furthermore, the truth of the clause can be seen in the preposition “toward.” In the Greek it eis (S.1519) meaning “into” something. The sense is going from one place “into” or “toward” another. For example: Matthew 2:12  “And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.” Notice that Joseph and Mary departed from the area around Jerusalem to go INTO their own country of Galilee. Another example: Matthew 15:11  “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.” Here Christ is explaining what does and does not defile man. Man is not defiled by putting something (food) INTO his body.
  
  If you wish to study this on your own, there is an abundant of Scripture containing this preposition. It is used over 1700 times in the New Testament. A few random choices should be enable you or anyone else to prove whether this is so or not. In any event, “as it began to dawn TOWARD the First Day of the Weeks” must mean during the final moments of the Sabbath day. The time line is being described as being in one day and going INTO another.
• This being so, the tomb was empty. How do we know this? Because Mary Magdalene never came to anoint the body of Jesus. She and the “other Mary” (presumably Martha’s sister), came to the tomb at this time because of the earthquake. They came as the Word of God says, “to SEE the sepulcher.” They were interested in what the earthquake might have done. Everyone else came at or near sunrise with the spices they had bought and prepared on Friday, the day between the Sabbaths that year (Matthew 28:5-9; Mark 16:2-8; Luke 24:1-9).
• Finally, I do not believe that the Roman guard would have gone into the city between midnight and 3AM and awakened the chief priests to tell them about what had happened. Just after sundown would be more likely for such a circumstance. The chief priest would still have been in the Temple area just after the evening sacrifices had been completed.

MORE TO COME

[John1one]

Continued to asaph,

In POST 28# you expressed a few more thoughts:
QUOTE ASAPH:

"I have an afterthought about John 20:1.

John 20
1  The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

It's about the phrase, "when it was yet dark." It seems to me that this implies there was darkness for some time before she came to the sepulchre and that sunrise was approaching. Otherwise why would John say that? It would have made more sense to say, "when darkness fell" or "when evening came", if he was refering to the moments just after sunset on Saturday."

The Greek word translated "yet" is eti (S.2089). Concerning its use to describe time it means a condition that formerly was so and is now in a different state; i.e. it was light and it is now dark or visa versa: it was dark and it is now light. I can also mean a condition continues at present; i.e. it was dark and continues to be dark.

It can therefore mean just as you say, however, this would no longer fit the Scripture: Matthew 28:1 where Mary was coming at sunset. See above.

Concerning your chart in POST #29, the day of Firstfruits does not have to be on the 16th of Nisan. It occurs on the 16th only when there is a double Sabbath during the Passover Festival. Notice Leviticus 23. There is a controversy over whether the Sabbath mentioned in Leviticus 23:11 means a 7th day Sabbath or Nisan 15, the Passover Holy Day Sabbath. The Sadducees and the literalistic Karaites believe it to be the 7th day Sabbath. The rabbis believe it to be the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Nisan 15) [reference The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible; "Weeks, Feast of"]. If the Sadducees are correct then the FIRST DAY OF THE WEEKS always falls on our Sunday. This is the method Christians use to count to Pentecost. If the rabbis are correct, then the FIRST DAY OF THE WEEKS always falls on the 16th of Nisan.

My thoughts about the reasoning of the rabbis is this: if the day always falls on the 16th, why must we count to find out what day the Feast of Weeks (or Pentecost) is? If it is always the 16th of the first month, the Feast of Weeks or Pentecost will always be the 7th of the 3rd month. Why count at all? In fact each and every other Festival is dated as to the 1st; 10th; 14th; 15th; 21st or 22nd of the month. The Word of God singles out the Feast of Weeks or Pentecost and does not give its date, but instead says count seven Sabbaths + 1 day to come to this particular Festival. This makes sense only if Pentecost is always on a Sunday with a varying date.

Moreover, with a Friday crucifixion, 6 days before the Feast, Nisan 15, would be Sunday or what we consider the triumphant entry. If this is so, the day before was a Sabbath. Jesus would not have been able to leave Jericho (John 12:1). The distance between Jericho and Jerusalem is about 18 miles. There is no record of Jesus resting before He came to Jerusalem. What are your thoughts?

Have a great evening my friend, and God bless you,

John1one

[asaph]

Greetings Asaph,
I hope you had a good weekend. Let's see where we are in our discussion: INCLUSIVE RECKONING Post 19:

Concerning the "three days and three nights" of Matthew 12:40 and the "after three days" of Matthew 27:68 and Mark 8:31 you said:

QUOTE ASAPH:

These verses are appealed to in order to propose a full 72 hours in the grave. They do seem to say a full 3 days and 3 nights don't they? How can this possibly be reconciled with the traditional chronology? If you believe the Bible cannot contradict itself, then these verses MUST be harmonized with the rest of scripture on the subject.

These Scriptures cannot be reconciled with traditional chronology - not without redefining them. While one can say that "three days and three nights" are THREE DAYS or their fulfillment can be referred to as the THIRD DAY, they cannot be referred to as "the day after tomorrow."

Yes, I do believe the Bible cannot contradict itself and therefore it is my (our) responsibility to read it in such a way that Scripture is harmonized without doing damage to what the words say. In other words, I MUST NOT redefine a phrase so it agrees with another phrase of Scripture. I must find out how they agree without imposing my own prejudices upon the Scripture.

QUOTE ASAPH

Well... please note the following story in 1 Kings-

1 Ki 12:5 And he said unto them, Depart yet *for three days*, then come again to me. And the people departed.

1 Ki 12:12 So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam *the third day*, as the king had appointed, saying, Come to me again *the third day*.

The king tells the people to depart for three days, but they return ON the third day, not on the fourth!! Why? Because the king did not mean to be gone for a full 72 hours. The counting of days was inclusive in nature. The same day that the king told them to leave was the first day. The second day they stayed away, and then they returned the third day, as the king had intended. This is the exactly the same manner of counting used for the resurrection. It is inclusive in nature, with whatever portion of the first and last days being counted as full days.

Just for good measure, this same story is told in 2 Chronicles-

2 Chr 10:5 And he said unto them, Come again unto me *after three days*. And the people departed.

2 Chr 10:12 So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam *on the third day*, as the king bade, saying, Come again to me *on the third day*.

Note the way this is worded compared to 1 Kings. Come again unto me after three days, depart yet for three days, and Come again to me on the third day, these all mean exactly the same thing, which is NOT a full three days or a full 72 hours.

There is nothing here said of "inclusive reckoning." Using our time frame for easy reference, the king could have said on Monday, "Depart from me for three days" or "Come to me 'after three days' " and if the people came to him on Thursday it would be just as the king requested. THERE IS NOTHING HERE THAT SAYS IT MEANS THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW!

QUOTE ASAPH

Luke 13:31 The same day there came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence: for Herod will kill thee.
Luke 13:32 And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.
Luke 13:33 Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.

Note that here in Luke 13, the third day clearly means the day after tomorrow, not after 3 full days. So, in light of all the evidence, Matt 12:40, 27:63 and Mark 8:31 do not really mean a full literal three days and nights or 72 hours, since Jesus clearly rose ON the third day. By Jewish understanding, referred to as inclusive reckoning, three days and three nights, and after three days, simply meant the same thing as ON the third day.

This is true, but how would you define "after 6 days" of Matthew 17:1 and Mark 9:2? Is it 4 days? Is it 5days? OR Is it just as it appears - 6 full 24 hour days?

The answer is: 6 full 24-hour days! There can be no question! How can I know that for sure? Well Luke 9:28 describes the same event saying "And it came to pass about an eight days after these sayings, he took Peter and John and James, and went up into a mountain to pray." Here Luke says ABOUT eight days. He is speaking of two actual partial days, but 6 full days. Matthew and Mark speak of only the WHOLE DAYS. Luke describes a time just before sunset being the 1st day, + 6 full days + a few hours after sunset and when the disciples were sleeping (the second partial day). WHERE IS THE INCLUSIVE RECKONING IN MATTHEW AND MARK?

How do you know for certain that inclusive reckoning MUST  be the defining principle concerning the time Jesus spent in the tomb? Throw out "tradition" and just use the Bible. If the tradition is true, the Bible with prove it. The Word of God should define tradition. TRADITION should NEVER define the Word of God!

MORE TO COME

John1one,
Then what does the third day mean to you how do you define it. Many passages say He rose the third day.

asaph

[asaph]

John1one,
Quote-

"Moreover, with a Friday crucifixion, 6 days before the Feast, Nisan 15, would be Sunday or what we consider the triumphant entry. If this is so, the day before was a Sabbath. Jesus would not have been able to leave Jericho (John 12:1). The distance between Jericho and Jerusalem is about 18 miles. There is no record of Jesus resting before He came to Jerusalem. What are your thoughts?"

My thoughts,
The verse in John 12:1 says:

1   Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.

It says 6 days before the passover, not the feast. The feast of unleavened bread began the day after passover. So the days counted were Saturday thru Thursday. This would allow Jesus to come to Bethany on Friday.

The rest of your posts were very thought provoking. If it were not for the many scriptures that say He rose the third day, I might go for it. Any way your posts are appreciated and I will wait patiently for the time when we will know for sure what happened.

God Bless,

asaph

[asaph]

John1one,
You wrote-
I know what many Christians think concerning Christ's promise to the thief (Luke 23:43), but I have never heard a satisfactory explanation for only the body of Jesus dying. If Christ did not "surely" die (Genesis 3:4), do we have a Savior? According to the Word of God, there is silence in the grave, no thoughts in one's mind or the ability to praise God or enjoy learning His Word (Psalm 30:9; 146:4; Isaiah 38:18-19). The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). If Christ did not pay that penalty, what did He do to pay for our sins?

As far as preaching to the "spirits in prison" who were disobedient during the time of Noah (1Peter 3:20), it was the Spirit of Christ in Noah that witnessed to those before the flood. Consider 1Peter 1:11, 12, where it plainly says that it was the Spirit of Christ in the prophets of old that witnessed to both the prophets and to those to whom they were sent.

Indeed Matthew 27:51-53 speaks of a resurrection, but the Word of God does not say exactly how long after Jesus' resurrection those saints rose from their graves. They were yet in their tombs at the time of Peter's first sermon on Pentecost, for as he testifies, the body of David was still in the grave near Jerusalem (Acts 2:29); so at this time David still slept as the Word of God says. Therefore Christ didn't take any spirit anywhere while He was in the grave for three days and three nights.

I say, amen!

asaph

[John1one]

Greetings asaph,
Blessings to you today.  In POST #35 you asked

QUOTE ASAPH:

John1one,
Then what does the third day mean to you how do you define it. Many passages say He rose the third day.

I believe "the third day" can be expressed "in three days and three nights" or anytime "the day after tomorrow." It would depend upon the context or the definition placed upon the clause by the speaker. My only contention with others' definition of "the third day" is that most will not permit the definition to include "three days and three nights" or a full 72 hours. If you were a 1st century Jew, how would you express 72 hours into the future? MUST you say "in four days" or "on the fourth day" to define 72 hours? Clearly, 72 hours is three days. My own opinion is that the definers of "the third day" use Luke 13:31-33 in the same manner in which they would accuse me of using Matthew 12:40. Rather than let the more definitive Scripture define the more obscure, tradition has done the reverse. Clearly "three days and three nights" is more descriptive than "three days" or "the third day." In Luke 13:31-33 Jesus is NOT speaking about His death and burial, but He is speaking about His death and burial in Matthew 12:40. Which Scripture do you believe should be used to define "the third day" as it pertains to the length of time Jesus would spend in the grave?

1Samuel 13:12, 13 places two of the clauses side by side. "Three days ago" = "three days and three nights." It is beyond my understanding to figure out any other way to say 72 hours. Certainly in their 3000 year history the Jews had to have needed to describe 72 hours or three actual days and three actual nights. How did they do it? How can one say that "the third day" CANNOT mean "three days and three nights?"

QUOTE ASAPH:

My thoughts,
The verse in John 12:1 says:

1  Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.

It says 6 days before the passover, not the feast. The feast of unleavened bread began the day after passover. So the days counted were Saturday thru Thursday. This would allow Jesus to come to Bethany on Friday.

First of all, every other reference to the time before the Passover in the Gospels refers to the FEAST DAY or SABBATH of the Passover. Notice Matthew 26:2, 5; Mark 14:1-2 where mention is made of two days before the feast of the Passover, and specific mention is made of the Feast Day being special. Then again in Matthew 26:17 and Mark 14:12 mention is made concerning one day before the Passover and Mark says that this particular day is when the Passover lamb was slain. This reference is of the evening or beginning of the 14th day of Nisan, because at the daylight portion or the end of the day, Jesus was slain at the exact time the Passover lamb was slain. Nevertheless, six days before the Passover can technically mean what you say, but it would be out of the character of the other references.

MORE TO COME

[John1one]

Continued to asaph,

Secondly, if it did mean Saturday, we must then ask: when did Jesus rest? It is plain that He went to Jerusalem BEFORE He went to Bethany for He came from Jericho to Jerusalem and from Jerusalem to Bethany (Luke 19:1, 28-29). Notice that Jesus never left the mount while the disciples went and took the colt. Then Jesus proceeded to ride the colt (couldn't be a Sabbath - Deuteronomy 5:14) and went into Jerusalem.

Indeed Jesus did come up from Jericho on Friday, six days before the Passover Feast day (or Sabbath). He came from Jericho and entered Jerusalem. This was His first entry and no one in the city knew who He was (Matthew 21:10). The whole city was moved at His coming, but the pilgrims didn't know who Jesus was. After He threw the money changers out of the Temple and taught awhile, He left for Bethany (Matthew 21:17; Mark 11:11) when evening approached. There they made a supper for Him (John 12:1-2). This was the evening of the sixth day before the Passover (John 12:1). This was not the day He rested. But He rested at Bethany in the home of His friend Lazarus on the 10th day of the month, the day the Jews were to choose the Passover Lamb. For the next five days this Lamb was inspected for blemishes - first by the Pharisees and Herodians (Matthew 22:15-22); then the Sadducees (Matthew 22:23-33); then the scribes or lawyers (Matthew 34:-46), but none found fault not even with false witnesses (Mark 14:56; Luke 23:4, 14; John 18:38; 19:4, 6).

I must conclude that He rested on the Sabbath, the 5th day before the Passover (Feast Day). Why do I say this? Notice what Jesus does when He enters Jerusalem from Bethany. He first "finds" the colt (John 12:14). It was not tied up waiting for Him as before. It too was resting. Then He heads toward Jerusalem and the whole city (Jerusalem) comes out to meet Him, because they found out He was coming (John 12:12-13). At this time Mark  helps John's account with more detail. Notice He is coming from Bethany not Jericho (Mark 11:12) and desires to eat a fig from a tree (Mark 11:13). He finds none and curses the tree (Mark 11:14), then He entered Jerusalem and cast out the money changers from the Temple for a second time in three days (Mark 11:15). This is the "Triumphant entry" and not the one recorded in Matthew or Luke. In Matthew they did not know who He was (Matthew 21:10). In John 12:12 the news of Jesus coming to Jerusalem had reached the folks there and they went out to meet Him. They heard from the locals that Jesus had raised Lazarus from the dead only a few weeks prior (John 12:17-18). There was such a commotion that the priests and Pharisees feared that the whole nation of the Jews scattered throughout the world would be behind Him (John 12:19). This was indeed the Triumphant entry and four days before the Passover Feast Day.

Nevertheless there is an additional entry on the day following the triumphant entry and the cursing of the fig tree (Mark 11:20, 27). Notice that in Luke 19:39-40 that the Pharisees became upset with Jesus that the disciples were praising Him as Messiah. This was done in the Temple, after His entry on Friday - the sixth day before the Passover Feast (Matthew 21:15-16). Therefore Luke is recording an additional entry, though it appears to be only one. Notice as well that Luke records that Jesus wept over the city, saying that they had not known the hour of their visitation (Luke 19:41-44). Clearly the leadership had rejected His being Messiah by criticizing the disciples praise (Matthew 21:15-16). Nevertheless, on that first entry the people were innocent. They didn't know who Jesus was (Matthew 21:10-11). The fact is, the multitude came out to meet Jesus for His second and triumphant entry (John 12:12-13). However, when they asked to speak privately with Jesus (John 12:20-21), and when He told them that He must die to save them (John 12:32-33), they responded with great disappointment asking who is this Son of man or Messiah (John 12:34). My point here is to show why Jesus wept in Luke 19:41. He wept because no one from the city came out to meet Him on that day. This third entry shows that the people also rejected Him as Messiah. Why would He have wept during the triumphant entry? Why would He say that He was rejected before everyone did reject Him? There must therefore have been at least three entries. This would have been three days before the Passover.

The second day before the Feast Day, He spent at Simon's home (Matthew 26:6) and one day before the Passover is recorded in Matthew 26:17. The Holy Spirit has seen fit to show us where Jesus was and what He was doing in each of the 7-8 days before the Passover Feast Day (two spent passing through and lodging in Jericho). This is true ONLY for a Wednesday crucifixion. A Friday and Thursday crucifixion cannot give an accurate agenda of the final week of Christ's earthly life.

QUOTE ASAPH:

The rest of your posts were very thought provoking. If it were not for the many scriptures that say He rose the third day, I might go for it. Any way your posts are appreciated and I will wait patiently for the time when we will know for sure what happened.

Asaph, you are a true gentleman. I appreciate your manner. I hold to some non-traditional Christian view points - not of Christ, not of the Godhead - but in other areas. Some people do not consider me a Christian, because I don't agree with them and they have no Scriptures to counter what I say. I can respect the viewpoint of others. We all arrive at what we believe through much inward struggle, but you are the first to disagree with me who has shown any respect at all for what I think. Thank you.

Concerning an earlier post I had written to A4C, you said:

QUOTE ASAPH

I say, amen!

My friend, I am indeed overwhelmed. No one has ever received what I said about that Scripture. It too is a non-traditional point of view. I am used to rebuke and outright attack. I wish we lived in the same neighborhood.

God bless you and your family,

John1one

[asaph]

John1one,
To quote you-
No one has ever received what I said about that Scripture. It too is a non-traditional point of view. I am used to rebuke and outright attack. I wish we lived in the same neighborhood.

That is a sad commentary on the people of God. I don't know anyone personally who agrees with a lot of things I see from the scriptures. That's ok but to be suspicious and closed minded over these things even in the face of overwhelming evidence really rubs me the wrong way. But if we are committed to loving them in Christ a lot of sins will be avoided and a multitude covered over.

To get back to Peters sermon at pentecost, speaking of David not being resurrected yet, could it be possible that David was'nt included in the number that came out of their graves after Jesus rose? Look at how the Matthew passage words it:

Matthew 27
 51   And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52   And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53   And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

The key words are "many bodies." Therefore David did not neccessarily have to be in that number. My thinking is that David will rise at the coming of Jesus.

1 Cor 15
22   For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23   But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Those that came out of their tombs after Jesus was raised would be a part of the sheaf waved, after all a sheaf is a bundle. For whatever reason, God did not include David in that number.

Just a thought.

Well, you pretty much stated your case very well on a Wednesday Passion, but a have a lot of pride to overcome so I am not yet ready to concede. Pray for me brother.

asaph

[John1one]

Greetings asaph,
QUOTE ASAPH:

That is a sad commentary on the people of God. I don't know anyone personally who agrees with a lot of things I see from the scriptures. That's ok but to be suspicious and closed minded over these things even in the face of overwhelming evidence really rubs me the wrong way. But if we are committed to loving them in Christ a lot of sins will be avoided and a multitude covered over.

Perhaps I responded to you in a manner that gave you the wrong idea. When I said that I am used to rebuke and outright attack, I was speaking of when I am clear concerning a position I take that is not the traditional point of view. I don't remember anyone treating me badly, if I merely disagreed with them in the same manner that denominations disagree with one another.

Concerning the Wednesday crucifixion and Christ's response to the thief, both of these subjects are non-traditional Christianity. What some refer to as cults would agree with the position I have taken with them. I believe that this is why at times some will rebuke me, because they think I am taking a position of a cult and speaking against Christianity. It is more of a misunderstanding than anything else. Actually, in the beginning, I thought you were going to take that position when you posted the link. I was pleasantly surprised when you never mentioned it again and just spoke from your heart.

I did leave a board once because I was accused of not being a Christian. I had spoken about a subject that had been debated by the early Church fathers, but I had taken the minority position. Consequently, I was rebuked by one man in a manner that I found unreasonable. I did not wish to attack him as I felt he had done to me. I was embarrassed, because I knew others whom I respected on the forum were reading what was being said. I left the forum.

QUOTE ASAPH:

To get back to Peters sermon at pentecost, speaking of David not being resurrected yet, could it be possible that David was'nt included in the number that came out of their graves after Jesus rose? Look at how the Matthew passage words it:

Matthew 27
51  And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52  And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53  And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

The key words are "many bodies." Therefore David did not neccessarily have to be in that number. My thinking is that David will rise at the coming of Jesus.

I have heard several positions about these verses. One position is that a number of people were resurrected to a natural life and were seen by many who knew them and were thus a witness to the Resurrection of Christ.

Considering the uproar that resulted in raising Lazarus, I have to decline this position. There is nothing in history to support this, which certainly would have to be addressed if "many" were resurrected.

I have heard your point of view before as well, but for the life of me, I do not understand why David would remain in the grave while others were resurrected. While God is sovereign and can do as He pleases, nothing in Scripture would indicate a partial resurrection. "MANY" is used for "ALL" in Romans 5:15  "But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one (Adam) many be dead..."

QUOTE ASAPH:

1 Cor 15
22  For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23  But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Those that came out of their tombs after Jesus was raised would be a part of the sheaf waved, after all a sheaf is a bundle. For whatever reason, God did not include David in that number.

I have to be quite literal here. I do not believe that anyone could be a part of the sheaf or bundle of grain that was offered to God. First of all, no one could be resurrected until that offering was accepted by God. The entire Wave Sheaf Offering represented Christ, for only Christ ascended into heaven to be ACCEPTED by our heavenly Father.

The Scripture above says that Christ (no implications of anyone else) is the first fruits, and afterward we who are His will be resurrected when He returns.

QUOTE ASAPH:

Well, you pretty much stated your case very well on a Wednesday Passion, but a have a lot of pride to overcome so I am not yet ready to concede. Pray for me brother.

You didn't even have to ask, brother. I covet your prayers as well. My faith at one time was overcome by a man. I was only a young man at the time, but it has changed me forever. After leaving the man, I backslid from Christ as well. When I returned to God I vowed to Him never to trust a man again. I qualified that saying I would receive anything He gave me through His children, but unless I understood it, I would not accept it. Consequently, I am more argumentative than I need to be. I have been working on this in my walk with Christ, but I have a great way to go before I would consider that my attitude is like His. Thank you for the discussion. I appreciated it more than I can explain. Thank you for your prayers. You are a good friend and brother in Christ.

God bless,

John1one

[Brave Saint]

Wow, does this thread not matter. In the realm of not mattering, this ranks number one.

[TalmidDaniel]

You are absolutely correct. It was a Wednesday crucifixion.

I agree, “Interesting!”

Nevertheless, when did the women have a chance to buy (Mark 16:1) and prepare (Luke 23:56) the spices to anoint the body of Christ?

If you have back to back Sabbaths for the Passover (the Holy Day on Nisan 15, and the weekly Sabbath), the places of business would be closed.

I have to go with a Wednesday crucifixion!

God bless,

John1one

[Petro]

After everything has been said and done on this thread;

How is it,  you who believe Jesus was crucified wednesday or thrusday, reconcile the scriptures, herein with this opinion.

Luke 24
1  Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
13  And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
14  And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
15  And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.
16  But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
17  And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?
18  And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
19  And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
20  And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
21  But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
22  Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;
23  And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
24  And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
25  Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26  Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?

Please note, verse 21, especially extra carefully.


"today is the thrid day", speaking of TODAY as in the "first day of the week" in verse 1.

Are the scriptures wrong??  at this passage..

Blessings,
Petro