What day did Christ Die?

[revmwc]

Please do not claim you know how Jesus was using the phrase! All we have is the text.
I showed how He could have been using the phrase. As for four days, do you have a passage that indicates it might not have been four days including inclusive counting and part day counting? The counting method in use, as demonstrated by scripture, tells us four days could be as short as a little over two days, a small part of day one and four along with two full days. On the other hand it could be as long as four full days. Nothing I have presented contradicts this understanding. And I think someone in a tomb for four or nearly four days would "stinkth."

I didn't say nor did I claim to know how Jesus was using it, I said to determine how He used you must compare scripture for scripture. If the use in the Hebrew in Jonah was literal 3 days and 3 nights then Jesus in using the reference would have been showing His use, if it were a colloquialism in Jonah then by all means He was using colloquialism.

Do you have passages referencing this, to prove it a colloquialism? Can you say that the Jonah reference had nothing to do with the prophecy? My point is if you can determine the use of the term in Jonah then you know what Jesus meant, until then we are all speculating.

 

[revmwc]

"that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,"

not the forth or fifth day


The thing is that during that time, "three days and three nights" could refer to both 72 hours or any part of 3 days(part of 72 hours).

Either way, everyone has to take something literal and something figurative. I take the "3 days and 3 nights" as figurative because it was a common thing of the day. Remember, we have to interpret Scripture as how the writer originally meant it. The other way is to take "on the third day" figurative. It seems more likely to me that the "3 days and 3 nights" would be the figurative one since that was a common thing of the day.

So why the reference to Jonah? See how was it used in the Jonah story. Jesus used it explicitely to show how long he would be in the heart of the earth. So we can compare scripture to scripture in this case, but it will take a knowledge of Hebrew to really determine it.

 

[freeatlast]

"that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,"

not the forth or fifth day


The thing is that during that time, "three days and three nights" could refer to both 72 hours or any part of 3 days(part of 72 hours).

Either way, everyone has to take something literal and something figurative. I take the "3 days and 3 nights" as figurative because it was a common thing of the day. Remember, we have to interpret Scripture as how the writer originally meant it. The other way is to take "on the third day" figurative. It seems more likely to me that the "3 days and 3 nights" would be the figurative one since that was a common thing of the day.

yes but aren't your assuming that He arose early sunday morning?

 

[Van]

No I am refering to matt 27:63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.

His resurrection took place after three days not during three days.

Matthew 27:63 pretty much says the same thing as Mark 8:31, so my response remains the same.

You seem to deny part day counting as being used in scripture as "day" counting. Let me try again. Luke 13:32 says (NASB), "And He said to them, "Go and tell that fox: Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow and the third day I will reach My goal. Jesus was not speaking a full "today" for it was "today" so "today" only referred to part of "today." Tomorrow is a full 24 hour day. But then Jesus says, "on the third" so during the third day, which would be a part day, Jesus is saying it was the third day. Therefore both inclusive counting and part day counting is used by Jesus.

You assertion that after three days must refer to after three full days, rather after three full or part days, has no support in scripture.

 

[revmwc]

yes but aren't yuo assuming that He arose early sunday morning?

He was seen early Sunday morning, He could have possibly been out of the tomb as early as 6:00 P.M. on Saturday (jewish Sunday). Again if it is Wednesday which is really all that will fit with a literal 3 day and 3 night meaning then could He have been alive as early as 6:00 P.M. on our Saturday?

I have asked a few of my pastor friends this questions and they say it is possible, and others say it is a colloquial term so it is food for thought. We definitely can't prove He was alive before he was seen but it is interesting and makes you think.

I have not and am not saying it isn't possible that it was a colloquilism, but if it wasn't then when was He actually alive?

 

[freeatlast]

Matthew 27:63 pretty much says the same thing as Mark 8:31, so my response remains the same.

You seem to deny part day counting as being used in scripture as "day" counting. Let me try again. Luke 13:32 says (NASB), "And He said to them, "Go and tell that fox: Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow and the third day I will reach My goal. Jesus was not speaking a full "today" for it was "today" so "today" only referred to part of "today." Tomorrow is a full 24 hour day. But then Jesus says, "on the third" so during the third day, which would be a part day, Jesus is saying it was the third day. Therefore both inclusive counting and part day counting is used by Jesus.

You assertion that after three days must refer to after three full days, rather after three full or part days, has no support in scripture.

No I am not dealing with how the days are counted. My question is if we use parts of days as three days and we claim He rose on Sunday while counting Sunday as the third day how can scripture be reconciled when it says after three days he will rise? In other word we cannot have Sunday as the third day and after the third day at the same time.

 

[Van]

I just showed you that Jesus counted part days as days. Thus after part of Sunday would be after three days if we count part of Sunday as a day, just as Jesus did in Luke 13:32.
Jesus said the third day He would reach His goal. So He counted a part of day three as the third. Thus after the first part of day three, would be after the third day. Ditto for the first day.

Notice Luke 18:33 where it says "the third day." Your view denies this truth, He arose the third day, because it was not a full day. But if "the third day" means the same as after three days, then the accounts are consistent. Why pick one verse and deny another. Why claim "after" could only refer to full days rather than part days, as scripture indicates.

 

[freeatlast]

He was seen early Sunday morning, He could have possibly been out of the tomb as early as 6:00 P.M. on Saturday (jewish Sunday). Again if it is Wednesday which is really all that will fit with a literal 3 day and 3 night meaning then could He have been alive as early as 6:00 P.M. on our Saturday?

I have asked a few of my pastor friends this questions and they say it is possible, and others say it is a colloquial term so it is food for thought. We definitely can't prove He was alive before he was seen but it is interesting and makes you think.

I have not and am not saying it isn't possible that it was a colloquilism, but if it wasn't then when was He actually alive?

I am not disagreeing with you as I hold to a Wed crucifixion as it is the only explainationI can see fits scripture. Here are some links to what I hold to;
http://www.gerald285.com/index.php?p=1_29_Crucifixion-Week-1

http://www.gerald285.com/index.php?p=1_30_Crucifixion-Week-2

 

[freeatlast]

I just showed you that Jesus counted part days as days. Thus after part of Sunday would be after three days if we count part of Sunday as a day, just as Jesus did in Luke 13:32.

Let me clarify this to be sure we are on the same page. You are saying that Sunday was the third day and it was also the day after the third day?

 

[Van]

Yes!!! We have Mark 8:31, after three days, and Luke 18:33, the third day. They mean the same thing!! Never mind this view would get an "F" in today's math, this is how they counted things back then, with far less precision.

 

[freeatlast]

Yes!!! We have Mark 8:31, after three days, and Luke 18:33, the third day. They mean the same thing!! Never mind this view would get an "F" in today's math, this is how they counted things back then, with far less precision.

What evidence is there, apart from someone stating it to be so, that the Jew would call a day today and tomorrow at the same time?

 

[jbh28]

yes but aren't your assuming that He arose early sunday morning?

Wouldn't say assuming...

Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men. But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay.

(Matthew 28:1-6 ESV)​

 

[freeatlast]

Wouldn't say assuming...

Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men. But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay.

(Matthew 28:1-6 ESV)
​

Yes, but that does not say when He arose only when the women went to the tomb. He was already risen and it could have happened way before that. The roling away of the stone was not to let Him out but to allow the women to see that He was already out.

 

[revmwc]

Wouldn't say assuming...

Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men. But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay.

(Matthew 28:1-6 ESV)​

This brings up another question, why was the stone rolled away? It wasn't to let Jesus out. He went through locked doors in His ressurection body. It was to show He had in fact risen but when?

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

I don’t know if this has already been said-- but I remember a professor saying that by Jewish standards it would have been 3 days b/c he died before 6 pm on Friday (day 1); all day Saturday (day 2), & was still dead after 6 pm on Saturday going into Sunday (day 3). This would have fulfilled the 3 day prophecy to tee (at least according to my old proff). So I guess I’d vote for Friday.

 

[freeatlast]

I don’t know if this has already been said-- but I remember a professor saying that by Jewish standards it would have been 3 days b/c he died before 6 pm on Friday (day 1); all day Saturday (day 2), & was still dead after 6 pm on Saturday going into Sunday (day 3). This would have fulfilled the 3 day prophecy to tee (at least according to my old proff). So I guess I’d vote for Friday.

That was a bad vote! :laugh:

Read what a jew has to say;

http://www.gerald285.com/index.php?p=1_29_Crucifixion-Week-1

http://www.gerald285.com/index.php?p=1_30_Crucifixion-Week-2

 

[jbh28]

I don’t know if this has already been said-- but I remember a professor saying that by Jewish standards it would have been 3 days b/c he died before 6 pm on Friday (day 1); all day Saturday (day 2), & was still dead after 6 pm on Saturday going into Sunday (day 3). This would have fulfilled the 3 day prophecy to tee (at least according to my old proff). So I guess I’d vote for Friday.

Yes and it's mentioned that he was to be put down before the sabbath which would have started at 6pm Friday

 

[freeatlast]

Yes and it's mentioned that he was to be put down before the sabbath which would have started at 6pm Friday

There in lies the problem with many. They see Saturday (friday at sunset) as the only sababth, but there was two sabbaths during this time and one fell before the Saturday sabbath.

In the observance of the first Passover, God specifically instructed Moses that the lamb was to be slain in the evening of the fourteenth, which was the evening that ushered in the day of the fourteenth. The Jewish custom down through the centuries, therefore, was to slay the lamb early in the evening of the fourteenth of Nisan (which actually was done late in the afternoon of the thirteenth) and partake of it at the Paschal supper, which was on the evening preceding the day of Nisan fourteenth. The highly significant point, however, is that the law permitted the sacrifice to be slain any time "between the evenings." Thus God made provision for His Son, the true Paschal Lamb, to partake of the symbolic Paschal lamb (the passover) on the evening of the fourteenth and still offer Himself as an acceptable sacrifice before the setting of the sun on the day of Nisan fourteenth. God's way is perfect just as His Word is perfect.

Immediately upon the setting of the sun upon the day of the fourteenth of Nisan, the fifteenth of Nisan began. And according to Leviticus 23:6-7 and Numbers 28:18, this was the day that initiated the Feast of Unleavened Bread. In it, the assembly of Israel was to "have an holy convocation" and to "do no servile work therein." Don't miss this point, the day of Nisan fifteenth was always a Sabbath day! It made absolutely no difference on which day of the week it fell.

The nation of Israel was given a number of Sabbath days, among which the seventh-day Sabbath was only one type. The other Sabbaths, such as the fifteenth of Nisan, were considered to be "high" days; that is, they had even more significance than the regular seventh-day Sabbath.

One of the main reasons the Christian church holds to a Friday crucifixion is because the crucifixion day was followed by a Sabbath. Early church leaders jumped to the conclusion that this was a seventh-day Sabbath without carefully consulting the Scriptures. The Old Testament clearly teaches that every Nisan fifteenth was a Sabbath--and a high Sabbath at that. But John 19:31 tells us "that sabbath day was an high day." Therefore, the day of our Lord's crucifixion did not necessarily occur on Friday. It could have occurred on any day of the week.

 

[jbh28]

There in lies the problem with many. They see Saturday (friday at sunset) as the only sababth, but there was two sabbaths during this time and one fell before the Saturday sabbath.

In the observance of the first Passover, God specifically instructed Moses that the lamb was to be slain in the evening of the fourteenth, which was the evening that ushered in the day of the fourteenth. The Jewish custom down through the centuries, therefore, was to slay the lamb early in the evening of the fourteenth of Nisan (which actually was done late in the afternoon of the thirteenth) and partake of it at the Paschal supper, which was on the evening preceding the day of Nisan fourteenth. The highly significant point, however, is that the law permitted the sacrifice to be slain any time "between the evenings." Thus God made provision for His Son, the true Paschal Lamb, to partake of the symbolic Paschal lamb (the passover) on the evening of the fourteenth and still offer Himself as an acceptable sacrifice before the setting of the sun on the day of Nisan fourteenth. God's way is perfect just as His Word is perfect.

Immediately upon the setting of the sun upon the day of the fourteenth of Nisan, the fifteenth of Nisan began. And according to Leviticus 23:6-7 and Numbers 28:18, this was the day that initiated the Feast of Unleavened Bread. In it, the assembly of Israel was to "have an holy convocation" and to "do no servile work therein." Don't miss this point, the day of Nisan fifteenth was always a Sabbath day! It made absolutely no difference on which day of the week it fell.

The nation of Israel was given a number of Sabbath days, among which the seventh-day Sabbath was only one type. The other Sabbaths, such as the fifteenth of Nisan, were considered to be "high" days; that is, they had even more significance than the regular seventh-day Sabbath.

One of the main reasons the Christian church holds to a Friday crucifixion is because the crucifixion day was followed by a Sabbath. Early church leaders jumped to the conclusion that this was a seventh-day Sabbath without carefully consulting the Scriptures. The Old Testament clearly teaches that every Nisan fifteenth was a Sabbath--and a high Sabbath at that. But John 19:31 tells us "that sabbath day was an high day." Therefore, the day of our Lord's crucifixion did not necessarily occur on Friday. It could have occurred on any day of the week.

Interesting....

 

[freeatlast]

Interesting....

Yes and here is the full article in two parts. While it may seem long it is well worth it as it debunks any possible Friday crucifixion;

http://www.gerald285.com/index.php?p=1_29_Crucifixion-Week-1

http://www.gerald285.com/index.php?p=1_30_Crucifixion-Week-2

I have no problems with other days being proposed as the day of crucifixion if they just agreed with scriptures, but they don't.