Palm Sunday myth.

[robycop3]

The Hebrew calendar can be used.

I don't think so. Six days before passover that year was not on Sunday.

 

[37818]

I don't think so. Six days before passover that year was not on Sunday.

The 33 A.D. view 6 days before the Passover was a Saturday, for the entry into Jerusalem on a Sunday.
In 30 A.D. 6 days before the Passover was a Thursday, for the entry into Jerusalem on a Friday.

 

[Van]

We have no idea whether these claimed days and dates are accurate. And we do not know what year Christ died. All these claims that the Passover was not celebrated on Saturday are speculation.

 

[37818]

We have no idea whether these claimed days and dates are accurate. And we do not know what year Christ died. All these claims that the Passover was not celebrated on Saturday are speculation.

Here is a tool to check the Jewish calendar against our calendar:
Calendar Converter

There is only one date which fits the New Testament account where Mark 14:12 is the Passover per Exodus 12:18 and Exodus 12:6. And Luke 24:21 where Sunday is actually the third day since. The first day since would be Friday. The second day since would be the Saturday.
Now Mark 14:12 was a Wedensday that year. 6 days before John 12:1-2 is a Thursday, the next day John 12:12 would be Friday, the day of entry into Jerusalem.

 

[Ziggy]

The one hitch in any attempt to assign specific dates is the Mishnaic/Talmudic requirement that the month begins when the first visible sliver after the new moon is seen by the authorities in Jerusalem.

If the day is foggy or overcast, the beginning of the month may be delayed by one or at most two days. This alone could be a real hangup regarding any specific calculations.

 

[Van]

The one hitch in any attempt to assign specific dates is the Mishnaic/Talmudic requirement that the month begins when the first visible sliver after the new moon is seen by the authorities in Jerusalem.

If the day is foggy or overcast, the beginning of the month may be delayed by one or at most two days. This alone could be a real hangup regarding any specific calculations.

Thanks

 

[37818]

The one hitch in any attempt to assign specific dates is the Mishnaic/Talmudic requirement that the month begins when the first visible sliver after the new moon is seen by the authorities in Jerusalem.

If the day is foggy or overcast, the beginning of the month may be delayed by one or at most two days. This alone could be a real hangup regarding any specific calculations.

Yes, and that does not change the actual history, Mark 14:12.

 

[37818]

John 19:31 suggests the Sabbath referenced was a special Sabbath, an high day. This would accord with the feast of unleavened bread and resolve the other problems.

A weekly Sabbath falling during week of the feast of unlevened bread, say 17th, would not still be a high sabbath? As it was that all seven days of the feast had preparation for a lamb each day of the passover feast (Numbers 28:21).

 

[rlvaughn]

A weekly Sabbath falling during week of the feast of unlevened bread, say 17th, would not still be a high sabbath?

I'm not aware of the terminology being used elsewhere in the Bible, so I reserve judgment . Since the feast of unleavened bread was seven days, it is certain that a weekly Sabbath would always fall somewhere in that period of time, but it would not necessarily fall on the first or seventh days of the feast, which were also days in which no regular work was done (Numbers 28:18; 28:25). It seems that John is writing to and explaining things to people who might not be as familiar with the Jews customs (e.g. John 19:40). If it were the weekly Sabbath there would be no need for a special explanation, but if it were not the weekly Sabbath an explanation would be in order.

As it was that all seven days of the feast had preparation for a lamb each day of the passover feast (Numbers 28:21).

Did you mean Numbers 28:24, where it says offer daily? I agree, but don't see this would have the effect of making all seven days into high days. I am not sure I am following your point, so I may not have addressed it well.