Passover problems in the Gospels

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------hERICtic writes:
Please show me where it states the lambs were to be eaten at the beginning of the 14th. I agree. At the end of the 14th. I agree. The morning of the 15th. They left in the morning of the 15th. Nothing suggests the beginning of the 14th. In fact, if you notice, I always say the end of the 14th, beginning of the 15th, bc evening is such a murky area."In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat unleavened bread, until the twenty-first day of the month at evening." Exodus 12:18
"Thou shalt keep the feast of unleavened bread: (thou shalt eat unleavened bread seven days, as I commanded thee, in the time appointed of the month Abib; for in it thou camest out from Egypt: and none shall appear before me empty" Exodus 23:15"The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee, in the time of the month Abib: for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt." Exodus 34:18Evening as it the end of the day, hence why its seven days. If it started at the beginning of the 14th, it would be 8 days.I gave this scripture also previously, thinking that it refered to Passover somehow, I erred in that respect, but the point is the same. Between the evenings.EXODUS 29:38 And this is what you shall offer on the altar: two lambs daily, sons of a year; 39 the one lamb you shall offer in the morning, and the second [hasheni] lamb you shall offer between the evenings [beyn ha'arbayim]. 40 And a tenth of fine flour anointed with beaten oil, a fourth of a hin, and a drink offering, a fourth of a hin of wine, for the one lamb. 41 And you shall offer the second [hasheni] lamb between the evenings [beyn ha'arbayim]; you shall do it like the morning food offering and its drink offering, for a soothing fragrance, a fire offering to Jehovah.It refers to the time before sunset.Remember Peg, they ate in haste and on the morning of the 15th. To suggest they ate it in haste in the morning and waited around 24 hours is silly.Now remember, the Passover is eaten on the 14th. We are in agreement.12On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when it was customary to sacrifice the Passover lamb, Jesus' disciples asked him, "Where do you want us to go and make preparations for you to eat the Passover?"It is now the day the lamb is sacrificed. He is asked where they can eat the Passover meal. The earliest this can be is 6:01 Pm (13th has ended, 14th has begun), according to you. Evening at the start of the 14th.13So he sent two of his disciples, telling them, "Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him. 14Say to the owner of the house he enters, 'The Teacher asks: Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?' 15He will show you a large upper room, furnished and ready. Make preparations for us there."16The disciples left, went into the city and found things just as Jesus had told them. So they prepared the Passover.Passover meal is prepared.17When evening came, Jesus arrived with the Twelve. 18While they were reclining at the table eating, he said, "I tell you the truth, one of you will betray meone who is eating with me."Notice what it states. Evening came. This is the END of the day then. So its the end of the day AFTER the lambs are slain. So the Passover meal cannot have been eaten in the morning.I have to go to work. Tonight I'll try to get back to this point, your points about John (quick point in John, "eating the Passover meal" means the lamb) and Jazzns.Talk to you later.

Jazzns,I was not going to respond to later, but I have a few minutes. The reason we are at an impasse is that using scripture, it states the Passover is the 14th. I have given plenty of scripture to show this.In fact, PD, Peg and anyone else I have ever debated has agreed to this. Site after site, dealing with the OT, states this.I keep asking about what day the lamb is slain bc scripture clearly states its the 14th. You keep agreeing with me, then state the 15th is the Passover. But scripture clearly states the day the lamb is slain, is called the Passover. So I was trying to show the correleation. Scripture states lamb slain on 14th. Scripture states the day the lamb is slain is called the Passover.I understand the Lord passed over the doorposts at midnight, so technically, this should be called the Passover. Am I correct this is what you are stating? But for whatever reason, the 15th is not called Passover. Its called the FOUB. The 14th is called the Passover.Show me in scripture where it states the 15th is called the Passover using the OT.Once you can do this, I'll concede the point. Also, please explain why the OT scripture which states the 14th is the Passover is not the Passover, since you're claiming its the 15th.Thanks.Edited by hERICtic, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I was not going to respond to later, but I have a few minutes. The reason we are at an impasse is that using scripture, it states the Passover is the 14th. I have given plenty of scripture to show this.

​

In fact, PD, Peg and anyone else I have ever debated has agreed to this. Site after site, dealing with the OT, states this.

---

No I haven't. Please don't use me as support for your confusion.

Yea..... so I mean hERICtic doesn't even seem to be noticing that nobody agrees with him. Not even those are are sympathetic to a skeptical interpretation. I gave up as you saw.

---

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

Jassnz, to state no one agrees with me is not true. In fact, Greyseal and Peg both agree that it was the 14th. Of course, Peg and I are disagreeing on the time frame of the meal...I erred with PD. For that PD, I apologize. You did say the lamb was slain on the 14th, but the next day is Passover.Here is where the confusion lies.Can you please explain what these three verses mean?"In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at twilight (erev) is the LORD’S Passover." Leviticus 23:5"They observed the Passover in the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, at twilight (erev) in the wilderness of Sinai; according to all that the LORD had commanded Moses, so the sons of Israel did." Numbers 9:5Num 28:16 And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the Passover of Yahweh.You seem to be getting quite upset that I do not agree with you that the Passover is the 14th, yet all three verses state otherwise. Perhaps I am reading them wrong.I understand what you are PD are saying, that it was midnight that the lord passed over...therefore, the Passover should be on the 15th.Yet scripture does not call Passover the 15th, but the 14th.Perhaps it was the 14th at midnight that god passed over?

you'd be correct if we were to apply our current 'day and night' to the scripture. But the hebrews began their 'day' at sundown.So if we apply their reconing of when the 14th began, we'd have to say they ate the lamb at the very start of the 14th...at sundown. not if we are reconing when the day began in the same way they did. The morning would be 12 hours later when the sun came up. It would still be the 14th.

Peg, do you think god passed over Egypt at midnight the 14th or 15th?Here is the problem. 14th is called the Passover. So it makes sense that it was midnight the 14th.Yet the scripture I gave clearly states the evening meal would be eaten at the end of the 14th.Again, two issues you didnt address from my previous post: Point one shows the end of the days start the count, or it would 8 days of unleavened bread.Point 1, between the evenings refers to the end of the day.

3 Questions.Which part of the verses do you consider to be saying the 'end' of the 14th?Do you accept that the jews started their day in at sundown?If you eat unleavened bread on the 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th & 21st....how many days have you eaten unleavened bread?And final question:Do you realise that the passover and the festival of unleavened bread are actually 2 celebrations combined into one which take a total of 8 days?

Good morning.To answer your question, while ignoring mine... 1) Not sure what you are refering to with your first qustion.2) I have agreed many times, at sundown, new day begins.3) You have 8 days using your scenario. But the FOUB starts the day after Passover.4) Its an 8 day celebration. First day is called Passover, followed by the FOUB.Those are four questions you asked by the way. Now, can you address my questions that I previously asked?They're crucial issues that need to be covered.Also, heres some additional information: http://www.herealittletherealittle.net/index.cfm?page_nam...

you stated that the scriptures say that the isrealites were to 'eat the passover at the end of the day on the 14th'Can you show me which scripture you are reading which says to eat the passover at the 'end of the day on the 14th'? ok so if the new day begins at sundown, then the lambs could just as well have been eaten at the beginning of that day...at sundown.... why would they wait until the folllowing morning to eat? What would they eat at sundown (which is generally the time people eat their evening meal) on the 14th if not the passover lamb?keep in mind too that the angel was passing over houses where the lambs had already be slain and their blood was sprinkled on the doorposts. So seeing they were not to leave any of the animal over until the morning, this implies that the lambs must have been eaten during the night before the angel passed over the houses, yes? thats right... yet the FOUB clearly states that for 'seven days you will eat unfermented bread'
14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th & 21st....this is 8 days yet the scriptures you posted said 'you will eat ULB seven days from the 15th - 21st
So there is one day unaccounted for.... what did they eat on this day? Exactly. 1 day was to eat the passover lamb
7 days was to eat the unfermented cakes. If they at the lamb on the 15th, then the seven days of UFB would take them to the 22nd, yet the scriptures say they were to eat UFB from the 15th - 21st. Exodus 12:18If we can come to a conclusion on these 3 questions, then we can move onto your if we need to. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

Peg, I'm off to work...But you made a few errors in your last post. I will address them tonight hopefully.Can you please address the issues I have presented? I gave evidence with scripture and outside of scripture when the lambs were eaten. You keep ignoring this.

ok hERICtic, you win... i'll address what you posted.Your link info states
And it is not permissible to slay it during any period of the light, but during the period bordering on the evening, and let them eat it at the time of the evening, until the third part of the night, and whatever is left over of all its flesh from the third part of the night and onwards, let them burn it with fire . . . (Jubilees 49:1-2, 10-13, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, R.H. Charles)According to this, the lambs were not to be eaten in any part of the 'light' so eating after the sun came up was out of the question.You agree the day began in the evening. If the day began at dusk, and the above states that the lambs were to be eaten before any light appeared, then they must have been eaten sometime after sundown on the 14th. Yes?

The kicker is that the Passover as a celebration to memorialize the Exodus wasn't celebrated for over 700 years. (2 Chronicles 35:18) Probably because the ceremony wasn't set up until the priestly writings.From the Jewish Virtual Library on Passover in the Critical View section we see that the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread began separately. It is interesting to note that the Passover was a nomadic custom later attached to the Exodus. The reference in Joshua may be referring to the nomadic custom and not the Exodus custom. Food for thought.Even the Feast of Unleavened Bread was not originally attached to Passover. A little probable reality behind the story. So the month was originally called Abib but was changed to Nissan in the Exile.It's obvious that the Synoptics and the author of John differ on when Jesus died. John had his purpose for placing the crucifixion at the time the animals were sacrificed. It fit with the imagery of his theme.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

I am curious why you take this to mean that it necessarily wasn't celebrated. Not that you are wrong, I just don't it is obvious from the text (or translation) alone. I take this to mean that Josiah in particular was "bringing sexy back" to the passover to use a modern euphamism. "No Passover like it" and "None of the kings of Israel had kept such a Passover" to me are simply trying to beef up Josiah, not necessarily assume that the Passover was not celebrated in the intermediate years between Solomon and Josiah.IIRC, after the Judah/Israel split after Solomon, there was still a political issue of pilgramages to Jerusalem although I cannot remember if it was because of the Passover or not. If it was, this may be evidence in contradiction to what you just claimed. I am not 100% about this and Jewish history that early is not one of my main interests so forgive me for the challange if the answer is obvious.I am also confused because didn't you just say below that Exodus 12:21 was J? I am almost certain that J was pre-exilic and in fact J was pre-D. J and E are both the most primitive sources correct? If so then I am not sure how you can say that there was such a spotty observance of it pre-Josiah. The pro-Josiah writer was D correct? I realize I am trying to recall a lot from memory so forgive me if I am just wrong on all fronts. What amazes me is that so many other Gospels and writings were tossed as heretical by the proto-orthodox church for much lesser offenses than getting the crucifixion "wrong" (e.g. Gospel of Peter just for the possibility that it could be interpreted from a docetic perspective) how the heck did John make it into the canon? It is a question I haven't been able to find much of an answer yet. I mean you can't even say it was because of apostolic authority because once again Gospel of Peter was rejected.

---

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

quote:

---

I am curious why you take this to mean that it necessarily wasn't celebrated. Not that you are wrong, I just don't it is obvious from the text (or translation) alone. I take this to mean that Josiah in particular was "bringing sexy back" to the passover to use a modern euphamism. "No Passover like it" and "None of the kings of Israel had kept such a Passover" to me are simply trying to beef up Josiah, not necessarily assume that the Passover was not celebrated in the intermediate years between Solomon and Josiah.

---

I think the implication is that the priestly rules were different than what they had been used to. It started as a family celebration. I don't see that it was considered a sabbath. I guess more correctly, they didn't celebrate the combined celebration in the manner later required by the priests. It would be interesting to know if they still sacrificed a lamb for immunity when moving the herd.

quote:

---

IIRC, after the Judah/Israel split after Solomon, there was still a political issue of pilgramages to Jerusalem although I cannot remember if it was because of the Passover or not. If it was, this may be evidence in contradiction to what you just claimed. I am not 100% about this and Jewish history that early is not one of my main interests so forgive me for the challange if the answer is obvious.

---

I'm not 100% either, but I thought the critical view in the entry was intriguing. From what I was reading the Feast of Unleavened Bread was a celebration that required pilgrimage.

quote:

---

I am also confused because didn't you just say below that Exodus 12:21 was J? I am almost certain that J was pre-exilic and in fact J was pre-D. J and E are both the most primitive sources correct? If so then I am not sure how you can say that there was such a spotty observance of it pre-Josiah. The pro-Josiah writer was D correct? I realize I am trying to recall a lot from memory so forgive me if I am just wrong on all fronts.

---

Yes, J & E are considered the earliest writings. My source has Exodus 12:21 as the E author, which would have been the Northern kingdom. He also noted that verses 12:24-27 that some scholars have suggested that a Deuteronomistic editor added these lines since they have some small similarities to Deuteronomistic texts. So they seem divided on that issue.If we take out the later Priestly writing, we see that Moses referred to the lamb as a passover lamb. He knew what God was going to do and he knew they needed immunity. Since the book is cut and paste, we don't know what, if anything, is missing. We don't know if in the original story, God told them to sacrifice the lamb or not. Did the E writer have their own rules or was it just a basic memorial day a family could celebrate at home if they felt like it? Not necessarily set in stone. Yes, Josiah was the hero of the Deuteronomistic history.IMO, we can't know for certain what happened amongst the average people, but it does make one think. The Jews became more ritualistic while in exile.

quote:

---

What amazes me is that so many other Gospels and writings were tossed as heretical by the proto-orthodox church for much lesser offenses than getting the crucifixion "wrong" (e.g. Gospel of Peter just for the possibility that it could be interpreted from a docetic perspective) how the heck did John make it into the canon?

---

I don't have an answer either. I'll have to keep looking. It is curious through. More to think about.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion