Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Good Friday or Good Wednesday; What day did Jesus die?
Topic Started: Wednesday, 28. March 2012, 09:28 (343 Views)
Mairtin
Member Avatar

I've been reading "Jesus Christ -the Real Story" a booklet produced by the United Church of God and available on their website as a free download.

It's a fascinating booklet about the evidence that Jesus was a real living person and an explanation of the background to His life and ministry. There are two areas, however, where the UCG differ from traditional Catholic belief and I'm not convinced that we are right and they are wrong.

The first of these has to do with Jesus having brothers and sisters but I will take that to the thread on our Lady's perpetual virginity.

The second one is to do with what day of the week that Jesus was crucified. Traditional Catholic belief is that the Crucifixion took place on a Friday. I've always struggled with that. Jesus said " For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:40) . It was always explained to me that part-days count so Friday, Saturday and Sunday are three days, but there always seemed to be something of vagueness about the three nights.

The UCG claim that the Crucifixion took place on a Wednesday; the detailed explanation is on their website but basically they explain that the Jews celebrate a number of annual Sabbaths as well as the weekly Saturday sabbath - much like our Holydays and Sundays. They point out that John specifically says that the Crucifixion took place on one of these days - "for that sabbath was a high day" (John 19:31) so it was not necessarily , indeed most unlikely, a Saturday. They say that if it was a Thursday then following chronology would work:

  • Wednesday - day of preparation for high sabbath - Crucifixion about 3:00 p.m.

  • Thursday - high sabbath - day of rest

  • Friday - day of preparation for weekly Sabbath - women buy spices for the body (ties in with Mark 16:1 " And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices."

  • Saturday - weekly sabbath -day of rest -Jesus rises after sunset

  • Sunday - women go at first light to apply the spices and find tomb empty.

This seems to make far more sense to me than our traditional Good Friday focus, it fits exactly with all the NT accounts of the Crucifixion and Resurrection and it fulfils Jesus' own words about the 3 days and 3 nights. I can't help wondering why our Church persists with something that contradicts what Jesus clearly said and also the NT chronology when there is a straightforward explanation that does not contradict what He said.
Edited by Mairtin, Wednesday, 28. March 2012, 09:33.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anne-Marie

Mairtin
Wednesday, 28. March 2012, 09:28
Jesus said " For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:40) .
I too can do simple arithmetic, Mairtin... and I too have occasionally wondered about the (several) differences between what the Bible says, and quotes Jesus as saying, on the one hand and what our Church teaches on the other.
Like you, Mairtin, I have not managed to reconcile the conflicts.

Unlike you, however, Mairtin, I have thought privately and kept my thoughts to myself, because I have never thought it important, any more than I have not been bothered about Jesus' birthday being celebrated around the pagan festival in mid-winter, rather than (probably April) when He was really born. To me, particularly given two millennia, it matters no more to me than that the Queen's Official Birthday is not the same as her real one.

Where it does give rise to serious problems, is that if our Church is going to get all dogmatic talking what may, in reality, turn out to be nonsense... that does give rise to serious issues about whether anything it teaches can be relied on!

Do I believe God exists? Yes, of course I do - no doubt whatever about that.
Do I believe Jesus is the prophesied Messiah, Son of God, who came and died to save us? Yup, I believe that too.
Does the rest actually matter greatly? Not really.
Edited by Anne-Marie, Wednesday, 28. March 2012, 12:01.
Anne-Marie
FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Derekap
Member Avatar

Anne-Marie wrote:

"Do I believe God exists? Yes, of course I do - no doubt whatever about that.
Do I believe Jesus is the prophesied Messiah, Son of God, who came and died to save us? Yup, I believe that too.
Does the rest actually matter greatly? Not really
"

I agree, but I've no objection to anyone discussing or disputing the pros and cons. Both the New and Old Testaments tend to have anomalies.



Derekap
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
paul

What about church tradition. When did we nominate a Friday as the day of the cruxifiction? My guess would be around 400AD with Constatine.
Any other suggestions?

As Anne marie says it is not really significant but having tidy minds mean that we explore and question the doctrine ocassionally.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deacon Robert
Member Avatar

We have two accounts. One speaks of a meal with his disciples and their preperation for passover. Another tries to equate Jesus' sacrifice to the slaughtering of the Paschel lamb.Which is more accurate? Both are accepted by the church. Bothe are important that we discuss. When we have enough information it is then time to speak to our Pastors or Bishops for clarification
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Catholic Knight blog

Quote:
 
Exact Date of Christ's Crucifixion

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The subject of Jesus' crucifixion, particularly the date, is a sore one for some Christians, especially those of the Protestant Fundamentalist persuasion. The precise year of his crucifixion has been debated by scholars for centuries. Within the last 100 years, some groups have even called into question the day of his crucifixion, with a few groups insisting on Wednesday being the day of the event. If we go by the 'Bible Alone' without ever taking outside sources into consideration, one can see how this confusion might come about. However, all the clues we need for this little mystery are laid out for us plain to see, in black and white, just waiting for us to do our homework. The evidence is plentiful, once we're ready to start looking into what non-Biblical sources say about the astronomical events surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

Phlegon was a Greek historian who wrote an extensive chronology around AD 137:
Quote:
 
In the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad (i.e., AD 33) there was ‘the greatest eclipse of the sun’ and that ‘it became night in the sixth hour of the day [i.e., noon] so that stars even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia, and many things were overturned in Nicaea.’
- Phlegon, 137 AD

Phlegon identifies the year and the exact time of day. In addition, he writes of an earthquake accompanying the darkness, which is specifically recorded in Matthew’s Gospel.
...
Finally, we must look to the Jewish calender to verify that a Passover did occur on this date. Indeed it did. Nissan 15, the customary day for Passover, would have fallen on Saturday the 4th of April in 33 AD. That would have made this particular Saturday a "high sabbath" which is mentioned in the gospel accounts, and it would have made Friday the 3rd of April the day of preparation, when the lamb sacrifice was slaughtered in the Temple. This would have put Jesus crucifixion at exactly the time when the Passover lambs were being slaughtered, just hours before sunset, when Nissan 15 began on the Jewish calendar....
...
So there you have it folks. The definitive date of Jesus' crucifixion is settled by two undeniable astronomical events. The first extraordinary, recorded in the gospels, and confirmed by the written testimony of non-Biblical authors. The second quite ordinary and predictable, easily calculated and illustrated by the experts at NASA. Finally, we have the confirmation of the Jewish calendar, which confirms a Passover preparation on this very day, just as the gospels tell us. Jesus Christ was crucified at high noon, and died at 3 pm, on April 3rd, 33 AD.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

There's something missing from that interesting account. The writer tells us that Phlegon records the year of an eclipse and of an earthquake, and the time of day of the eclipse. (Incidentally, he doesn't say that these two events occurred at the same time- only in the same year, but that may not matter much for our purposes).

He then goes on to ask whether the Jewish calendar confirms Phlegon's date. Phlegon doesn't give a date for either event, only a year. I can only suppose that astronomical calculations point to an eclipse on 3rd April 33 AD, but the writer omits this step in the argument.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anne-Marie

OsullivanB
Thursday, 5. April 2012, 15:22
There's something missing from that interesting account.
There's summat else missing as well, OSB:
Phlegon lived 100 years after the event, yet gives no source for his 'knowledge' of an event of which he could not possibly have known without a clear source for that information, which is not provided to us.

Oh, and I DO note that the non-biblical Phlegon is preferred and accepted over the irrefutable Word of God in The Bible - odd from a Trad who rejects scientific evidence of evolution because it contradicts the biblical account, which could not possibly be wrong!
I do so love contradictions in arguments which show that they just may not stack up at all....
:snob:
Anne-Marie
FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Clare
Thursday, 5. April 2012, 15:10
... and it would have made Friday the 3rd of April the day of preparation, when the lamb sacrifice was slaughtered in the Temple. This would have put Jesus crucifixion at exactly the time when the Passover lambs were being slaughtered, just hours before sunset, when Nissan 15 began on the Jewish calendar....
So did Isaiah get it wrong when he prophesied that the Messiah would spend 3 nights in the tomb? Did Jesus get it wrong when He said the same thing?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

I wouldnt rule that out Mairtin. Prophesy often is better at the big picture rather than the fine detail. The number three might be a repetition for effect. It might be symbolic - 3 days being the length of a journey. In this case to Hades.

There is also some know confusion about whether the meal was a Passoverl meal or not - which Robert is referring to above. I think Scott Hahn has a note about this in the Ignatius study bible - I will look it up.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

I have just looked it up Mairtin. It is longer than I remember - a full page of dense discussion. Too much for me to retype. Scott Hahn plumps for Wednesday. He says that the Essenes followed a solar calendar and held Passover on a Wednesday. If Jesus chose that day much biblical and archeological and extra-biblical information is reconciled.


Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Gerard
Thursday, 5. April 2012, 18:41
I wouldnt rule that out Mairtin. Prophesy often is better at the big picture rather than the fine detail.
I wouldn't be all that bothered about Isaiah getting it wrong but I'd be very bothered about Jesus getting it wrong.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Why? I thought he was like us in all things except sin.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

P.S.

I dont think Jonah was factual so the reference to him might not be factual either.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Derekap
Member Avatar

From Clare's quotation panel:

"Finally, we must look to the Jewish calender to verify that a Passover did occur on this date. Indeed it did. Nissan 15, the customary day for Passover, would have fallen on Saturday the 4th of April in 33 AD"

This year (2012), today is the 5th of April, so yesterday was Wednesday 4th April.

2000 years ago records were not so plentiful nor meticulous as these days and there have been changes in the Calendar. Also different Churches observe their Easter on a different basis.
Edited by Derekap, Thursday, 5. April 2012, 21:45.
Derekap
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply