Mark 15:25 "And it was the third hour, and they crucified him."
John 19:14-15 "And about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! But they cried out . . . crucify him."
The common explanation I receive is a difference in conceptions of time - Roman vs. Jewish time:
quote:John penned his gospel sometime between 80 and 98 AD, most likely from Ephesus where he spent many years. There is NO question that it was written from the area of Asia Minor, for gentiles, and hence reflects a Greko-Roman conception of time. Ephesus, capital of the Roman providence of Asia, operated under the Roman system of numbering time instead of the Jewish system. The Jewish time system started numbering from sunup, approximately 6 AM. Matthew, Mark and Luke used the Jewish system, and give the third hour (9 AM) for crucifixion, sixth hour (Noon) start of darkness, and the ninth hour (3 PM) for Jesus’ death. Roman time numbering started at midnight, and, when John states that Jesus was handed over to be crucified sometime after the sixth hour he is referencing Roman time, 6 AM. Clearly two and one-half hours from the time Jesus was handed over for crucifixion (after 6 AM), until the actual crucifixion (9 AM) fits the time frame perfectly.
The reason Matthew, Mark and Luke used the Jewish time system can be easily explained by the fact that while Mark probably wrote from Rome his source was Peter who used the Jewish time system. Most scholars believe Matthew and Luke used both Mark and Q as source material, which would explain why they agree with Mark.
Anyone feel free to correct me if I am wrong, I am going from memory here. I won't be able to give you exact chapter and verse, but this is what I remember from my sunday school days.
In one of the accounts, the Romans, at the behest of the Jews, are going to break the legs of Jesus so that he will die before the sunsets. When the sunset it marked the beginning of the Jewish Sabbath and Passover, and therefore arrangements for his burial needed to be made before then. However, it was recorded that Jesus died just before sundown, so this would put his time of death in the late evening, probably between 6 and 8 pm (which sounds about right for "near sundown" in the Mediterranean during the spring).
Also, can anyone give me the info on whether Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday or a Friday. I understand that there is controversy over the use of Sabbath and High Sabbath, and their placement in the week. Thanks.
I believe most scholars still put it on friday. There's no mention of a special sabbath anywhere near the crucifix accounts. The problem that if friday is true, then Jesus wasn't in the grave 3 days and 3 nights is usually countered by the fact that Jews counted the first day as the same day. It is huge complicated stuff as found; http://www.bible.ca/d-3-days-and-3-nights.htm#V but they reckon that 3 days in a Jewish account would mean in our thinking three days and 3 nights. So, when Luke said 3 days and 3 nights, he meant 3 days as the Jews meant. Ooops, did you want to know all this
quote:The problem that if friday is true, then Jesus wasn't in the grave 3 days and 3 nights is usually countered by the fact that Jews counted the first day as the same day.
Using a liberal definition of "day" the case could be made for 3 days and nights. However, it is a little more accurate to use hours. Using a time of death at 6 pm on Friday we arrive at these calculations:
6 pm fri to 6 pm saturday = 24 hours.
Then Jesus rose from the dead saturday night (our time) or rather Sunday morning (jewish time).
So, 6 pm saturday to 3 am saturday night/sunday morning = 9 hours
For a total of 33 hours. You could also move the time up for the ressurection to 10 pm, and then you would have Jesus coming to life only 28 hours after dying. Not exactly what 72 hours as implied by 3 days and three nights.
quote:so maybe he didn't rise on sunday and sunday church is a result of the simple transfer of the roman church system from pagan to christian and a continuation of sun worship?
Jesus's disciples discovered the empty tomb on Sunday morning, so the practice of having church on Sunday to commemorate this event is not too far fetched. Christ rising before dawn on Sunday is supported by the story of the Roman soldier who met an angel on Sunday night, after which it is assumed that Jesus left the tomb.
What strikes me as strange is that two ideas seem to conflict. It is said that it would be impossible for the disciples to have moved the tombstone away, yet the Romans felt it necessary to post a guard. Why would you post a guard at an impenetrable tomb? To stop vandalism?
However, there are other inconsitencies that others have pointed out, but don't take them as refutations of the crucifixion. First, it took a long time for people to die on the cross, sometimes more than 24 hours. Here, we have Jesus dying after a very short amount of time (say 2-3 hours). Second, we have Jesus being buried in a tomb on private land, and therefore access to the tomb is controlled by Joseph of Arimethia (sp?), who also happened to be a supporter. Third, we actually have less than 48 hours between burial and resurrection. In other words, Jesus's crucifixion was quite different than your normal criminal execuation, both in the speed with which Jesus died and the way he was buried.
The theory that some put forward is that Jesus was actually alive when he was taken down from the cross. Although I am pretty neutral on the matter, the case does have some merit (and I stress "some"). However, it is reported in the Gospels that Roman soldiers pierced the side of Jesus with a spear to judge whether he was alive or dead. This is a big hole that this theory can't seem to get around. Only by ignoring this part does the theory hold any water, or somehow explain away the lethality of being pierced in such a manner.
Post 7 and I am already getting things off track. Oh well. Perhaps the lesson here is that people stressing "3 days and 3 nights" are in fact pushing the envelope of what is actually in the Gospels, not that the Gospels are incorrect. Sunday worship among christians is not contradictory to the day of the Ressurection, but is consistent with worshiping the discovery of the resurrection which is really what christianity is about. Hope this all made sense.
quote:um. the bible doesn't say sunday, it says the third day.
Yes, and it is correct, if a liberal meaning of "day" is applied. Jesus died on Friday, day one. Still dead on Saturday, day two. Still dead on Sunday, but also rose on Sunday. So he was dead for part or a whole of those three days, and rose on the third day.
The Jewish way of defining days is sundown to sundown. That is, Saturday starts when the sun goes down on Friday. Hence the Sabbath starts at sundown each Friday. This is an important clue, as the Jewish supporters of Jesus were worried that he would die on the Sabbath, or Friday after sundown. Therefore, he died on Friday and the numbering works if you define Friday as day one.
what is it with liberal meanings of days and interpreting the bible? *sigh* why is it so hard to believe that sunday is a carryover from paganism? christmas is. easter is. heck, easter is still named for the fertility goddess.
quote:what is it with liberal meanings of days and interpreting the bible?
Given the current translations of the bible, I see no problems with it. And, nowhere in the Bible does it require christians to meet on a precise day each week. The Apostle Paul does teach that christians should congregate and socialize together to help solidify their faith among the congregations. Worsphipping on Sundays may have very well been caused by christians adopting Roman worhsip styles, but in the end it really doesn't matter. The theology of the Bible would not change if Jesus died on Monday and rose on Thursday.
quote:why is it so hard to believe that sunday is a carryover from paganism? christmas is. easter is. heck, easter is still named for the fertility goddess.
I am of the opinion that the reason behind celebrating on a certain day doesn't matter. However, WHAT you celebrate does define the religion. And you are completely correct, both Easter and Christmas were pagan ritual days that christianity co-opted when it spread through Europe. It was a way of removing the pagan traditions by replacing them with christian traditions, a device used by missionaries to this very day.