The date of the crucifixion.

I understand your position fully and completely. But I'm not sure you understand mine. I hope you will read the following, carefully and thoughtfully. I don't think of it as "my position" but rather The Bible's Position, as illustrated by those three anchor verses posted earlier that are at pains to say, "Not on the feast", "Not on the feast", and "Now before the feast". Here goes:

The principle must not be infringed, that Jesus came to fulfill the Law. Any interpretation that breaks that principle is incorrect. Jesus is The Passover Lamb. Who wants to claim otherwise? When is the Passover to be killed? 15 Nisan? Incorrect. If the fulfillment of the Law, Jesus Christ, the true Passover Lamb is not being killed on 14 Nisan, then God is not in His Heaven. Who thinks God doesn't know the day and the hour of Passover? Think about that. How many interpretations deny, unintentionally, that God is incompetent? The answer to that question is scary.

How then do we interpret passages like Mark 14:12-16? What did "The first of Unleavened" mean in Jesus' day?

"Unleavened" had become the traditional label for "Passover + The Feast of Unleavened Bread." Since this was the greatest festival of the new year, it was for them like Christmas is for us. There was much preparation that had to be done in advance because the actual feast's eating restrictions required planning. Most of that preparation had to be completed by 13 Nisan. Because all the "suppers" of the festival itself were more strict, it became traditional to have one last normal meal/feast before Passover, almost like a Thanksgiving Day meal or an "anything goes" meal because we're in store for a week of Law restrictions. This "last hurrah" supper was called, "the preparation meal", partaken at the end of 13 Nisan, "Before the feast of Passover". This meal had become a huge tradition. HUGE as in big. Was this meal a part of the Law? No. Was it tradition? Yes, and it seems on the whole a rather harmless tradition. This tradition had over time been included as a feature of the festival, "The Festival of Unleavened".

Since it had become part of the festival in Jesus' day, what day is "The first of unleavened"? 13 Nisan. You will notice in Greek, the word "bread" is not there but is included in most English translations. In Greek, it's, "first of Unleavened", not "first of unleavened [bread]". The translators are trying to be "helpful" but are in fact making it harder for the layman to figure out that it's not the actual first day of the feast proper. (Thank you, translators! Not)

John to the rescue.

That's why John prefaces his description of what occurred at the meal in the upper room (and everything else) with "Now before the feast of Passover". God made sure we had an anchor. John is describing what happened during the epic "preparation meal". And now we fully understand what the passages in Matthew, Mark and Luke mean when they speak of "preparing the Passover" (on 13 Nisan, last and biggest day of preparation) and "The first of unleavened". They are talking about the 13 Nisan epic meal before the Festival Requirements take effect.

Thank God for John.

John prefaces everything in 13:1 with "Now before the feast of Passover...", you know, BEFORE THE FEAST OF PASSOVER and they eat this meal, BEFORE THE FEAST OF PASSOVER, the traditional preparation meal which in those days had become a prominent feature of the festival of "Unleavened", and had become part of the festival.

By tradition, the first of unleavened is the preparation meal of 13 Nisan, not the first as defined by Law. That's what Matthew, Mark and Luke mean by "first of unleavened" -- the first as defined by tradition, not the first as defined by the Law. John confirms this in 13:1 by defining his "first" by Law. So in John, the upper room meal occurs before Feast of Passover as defined in the Law. John describes what the others describe as "the first [event] of unleavened" as had become the tradition of the day, but makes it clear that all of this occurred before the feast of Passover. All of it, until Christ's death on the cross.
​

Thank you for taking the time to arrive at a full understanding of "my argument". If you still have questions, I'd be happy to attempt answers.

 

I find it in the details of the meal in the upper room. That meal is manifestly not a Passover according to Law. Therefore, they are not eating the Passover. Since Jesus is the Passover Lamb, it cannot possibly be a Passover meal. If it was, Jesus wouldn't be there. He'd be dead already because Jesus is the Passover Lamb. Therefore, by deduction, they are eating the meal on 13 Nisan, not 14 Nisan.

I don't see any issues with the historical date.

 

How can what hes says be true? The Law demonstrates that they did not eat a Passover. Even you could see there are no loins girded, staves in hands and sandals on feet and eating in haste, all of it. And there is no staying indoors all night with blood on doorposts. That's a red flag right there. If it were Passover, they would not have gone out that night to the Mt. of Olives. There is no way you're putting blood on your doorposts and then leaving the house. That would totally destroy the commemoration. Outside is The Angel of Death. The whole point of blood on doorposts is to keep the Angel of Death OUT. You don't then leave your protection behind the door. That's crazy, even for a commemoration where there is no actual Angel of Death. You don't mess with God's commandment. Jesus is not disobeying the Law. He is fullfilling the Law.

The validity A.T Robertson's interpretations should be evaluated in the light of scripture. He simply falls short in this instance. I'm not saying to discard his work. I'm saying, "Be a Berean". Nobody gets everything right.

Up to this point, you have remained silent about Jesus being the Passover Lamb but ended up not dying on 14 Nisan when the Law demands the Passover lamb to die. How do you reconcile that?

 

When Jesus said he was fulfilling the Law, did that mean he was fulfilling targums?

Can you cite the Law that defines "Passover sin offering for 15 Nisan"?

 

You demanded Biblical references for my claims, then you offer a targum as evidence that, what, THE LAW CHANGED?

You said "Passover sin offering" on the 15th. Where are the words "Passover sin offering" regarding the sacrifice on the 15th? The Passover sacrifice was on the 14th.

Christ is our Passover. That's the 14th.

 

...and for all subsequent observances as a remembrance and teaching point for the next generation. Yes, I know this from the Law.

Was there a point you were trying to make because it looks like you're making my point.

 

So the traditions of men say and do things that aren't in the Bible. Jesus commented on that.

Meanwhile, Exodus 12:14 explains, without extra-Biblical qualifications. No change. Besandaled, bestaffed, begirded, eat in haste, stay indoors until morning. If it's a memorial. In scripture, it never changed. Scripture is Law, not tradition.

 

The First-born: Which sacrifices are required to be first-born? Isaac was a firstborn (when Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his dearly beloved son), Jesus was a first-born, beloved of the Father, the Passover Lamb has to be a first born animal, the Angel of Death kills the first-born (if there is not blood on the doorpost). Do you get the idea that Passover is all about the sacrifice of the first-born? How many clues are needed to persuade?

The sin offering on 15 Nisan is not required to be a first-born.

Observation of the lamb: The Passover lamb must be observed for 4 days before slaughter to see if there are any defects. Behold, from His entry on the colt of a donkey that had never been ridden, Jesus was observed by everyone in Jerusalem 4 days before His crucifixion. What was the verdict at the end of those four days? "I find no fault in him." Luke 23:4, John 19:4.

Everything points to Jesus as the Passover Lamb. No passover lamb is killed on 15 Nisan anywhere in scripture. ​

Conclusion: Is any of this enough to change someone's mind? Jesus said by means of the parable that people who wont hear Moses and the Prophets will by no means be persuaded by anybody -- even if they returned from the dead with the news.