Bob Thiel, leader of the improperly named "Continuing" Church of God, a self appointed/non-ordained upstart loves to mock the traditional observance by calling the Friday-to-Sunday timeline unbiblical “twisted mathematics” that fails to deliver a literal “three days and three nights” in the tomb (Matthew 12:40). He argues Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday (the Preparation Day before an annual “high day” Sabbath), buried before sunset Wednesday, and resurrected late Saturday afternoon—exactly 72 hours later—to fulfill the “sign of Jonah.” He dismisses Good Friday as a man-made tradition influenced by Roman compromise and pagan elements, claiming it makes “the word of God of none effect” (Mark 7:13) and denies the only public proof of Jesus’ messiahship.
Why Bob Thiel Is Wrong
Thiel’s position, while sincere and shared by some in certain Church of God groups, rests on a rigid, overly literal reading of “three days and three nights” that ignores ancient Jewish idiomatic usage of time. In biblical and Jewish culture, any part of a day was frequently counted as a full “day and night.” Examples abound:
- Esther 4:16 and 5:1 — Esther fasts “three days, night or day,” yet appears on the third day.
- Genesis 42:17-18 — Joseph imprisons his brothers for “three days,” then speaks to them “on the third day.”
- 1 Samuel 30:12-13 — An Egyptian servant is described as having gone “three days and three nights” without food or water, yet the timeline fits partial days.
Jesus Himself used inclusive reckoning when speaking of rising “on the third day” (Matthew 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Luke 9:22; 24:7, 46), a phrase repeated throughout the Gospels and fulfilled in the traditional timeline. From late Friday afternoon burial to early Sunday morning resurrection spans parts of three days (Friday, Saturday, Sunday) and aligns with “the third day” language used by the angels, Jesus, and the disciples (Luke 24:21, 46).
The Gospels explicitly place the crucifixion on the “day of Preparation” before the weekly Sabbath (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31, 42). John 19:31 notes it was also before a “high day” (the first day of Unleavened Bread), but this does not require two separate Sabbaths forcing a Wednesday death; the weekly Sabbath itself could be called “high” in context, and the women prepared spices after the crucifixion day but rested on the weekly Sabbath (Luke 23:56). Early Christian writers (e.g., Justin Martyr, Tertullian) and the consistent witness of the Church from the second century onward affirm a Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection. Claims of a Wednesday death rely on selective later sources (like the Didascalia Apostolorum) and calendar reconstructions that are debated even among scholars.
Moreover, Thiel’s broader critique—that Good Friday/Easter is pagan-tainted and that true Christians should keep only the biblical Passover/Holy Days—overlooks how the early Church, guided by the apostles and the Holy Spirit, developed its liturgical calendar to proclaim the fulfillment of those shadows in Christ (Colossians 2:16-17). The profound events of the Passion transcend a single calendar debate. Insisting on a Wednesday crucifixion risks missing the forest for the trees: the cross is not primarily about chronological precision but about God’s redemptive love.
The name “Good Friday” endures not because of perfect 72-hour math, but because of the goodness accomplished there.
The Deep and Profound Significance of Good Friday
Today, April 3, 2026, Christians around the world observe Good Friday—the solemn heart of Holy Week and the day that commemorates the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ. At first glance, it seems an odd name for the darkest moment in the Christian story: a day of betrayal, torture, public execution, and apparent defeat. Yet the name “Good Friday” carries layers of meaning that reveal the event’s extraordinary depth. Far from a simple anniversary of suffering, Good Friday stands as one of the most profound turning points in human history according to Christian belief—a day when divine love confronted human brokenness and, through sacrifice, opened the door to redemption.
Why “Good” Friday?
The word “good” here does not mean pleasant or happy in the modern sense. Linguists trace it to an older English usage where “good” meant “holy” or “pious,” much like “the Good Book” for the Bible. Some traditions once called it “God’s Friday.” In German it is Karfreitag (“Sorrowful Friday”), and in many languages it is simply “Holy Friday.” The English name endures because Christians see profound goodness in what happened: the ultimate act of self-giving love that accomplished something eternally beneficial for humanity. As one theologian has noted, it was “good” precisely because Jesus’s death was not a tragic accident but the deliberate fulfillment of God’s plan to rescue people from sin and death—even if the exact hours spark honest chronological debate among believers.
The Events That Changed Everything
According to the New Testament Gospels, Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane, tried before religious and Roman authorities, scourged, mocked, and nailed to a cross outside Jerusalem around the year 30 or 33 AD. He died around 3 p.m. on the Preparation Day before the Sabbath, uttering words of forgiveness, abandonment, and completion: “Father, forgive them,” “My God, why have you forsaken me?” and “It is finished.” His body was taken down before sunset and laid in a borrowed tomb.
To outsiders, this looked like the end of a failed messianic movement. To believers across centuries, it was the moment heaven and earth intersected in the most intimate way possible. God entered the full reality of human pain—not as a distant observer, but as one who bled, thirsted, and died. In that act, Christians see the ultimate expression of solidarity with every person who has ever suffered injustice, loneliness, or despair. Whether the precise day was what we now call Friday or another weekday in ancient reckoning does not diminish this reality.
The Theological Heart: Atonement, Love, and Redemption
The deepest significance of Good Friday lies in the Christian doctrine of atonement—the reconciliation of humanity with God. Christianity teaches that sin (humanity’s collective and individual turning away from God’s goodness) created a gulf no human effort could bridge. Jesus, understood as both fully God and fully human, stepped into that gulf. His death is seen as a substitutionary sacrifice: he took upon himself the consequences of sin so that forgiveness could be freely offered.
This is not abstract theology; it is profoundly personal. The cross reveals a God who loves not because we are lovable, but while we are still broken. As the apostle Paul wrote, “While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). It is love that refuses to be defeated by evil, refusing retaliation and instead absorbing violence in order to overcome it. In the words of countless Christian writers, the cross is where justice and mercy kiss—God’s holiness is satisfied not through our punishment, but through his own self-offering.
Good Friday also confronts the paradox of suffering. In a world still filled with injustice, war, illness, and grief, the cross insists that suffering is never the final word. Jesus’s cry of forsakenness assures believers that God understands abandonment. His resurrection (celebrated two days later on Easter) promises that death itself has been defeated. Thus, Good Friday is not merely mournful; it is hopeful. It declares that the worst day in history became the doorway to the best news humanity has ever received: you are loved beyond measure, forgiven beyond deserving, and invited into a restored relationship with your Creator.
A Day of Reflection and Response
Throughout history, Christians have marked Good Friday with fasting, silence, and solemn services. Many attend the “Three Hours’ Agony” (noon to 3 p.m.), pray the Stations of the Cross, venerate a cross, or simply sit in quiet contemplation. No Eucharist is celebrated in many traditions, underscoring the emptiness before Easter. The day invites everyone—believer or seeker—to pause amid the rush of life and ask: What does sacrificial love look like in my own story?
In an age of instant gratification and self-promotion, Good Friday offers a counter-cultural wisdom: true greatness is found in self-emptying service, forgiveness of enemies, and trust that God can bring life out of what looks like total loss. It challenges us to confront our own capacity for betrayal (like Judas), denial (like Peter), or indifference (like the crowd), while extending the same mercy we have received.
The End Is Not the End
Good Friday does not stand alone. It is inseparably linked to Easter Sunday. The profound significance of the day is that darkness was real, the cross was cruel, and death was certain—yet none of it had the last word. The tomb would be empty. Hope would rise.
On this Good Friday, whether you approach it as a lifelong believer, a curious observer, or someone simply seeking meaning in suffering—or even if you question the exact weekday like Bob Thiel—the invitation remains the same: look at the cross. See there the length to which love will go. And dare to believe that the same power that turned the worst day into the greatest victory can still transform lives, relationships, and even the world’s broken places.
In the end, Good Friday is “good” because it reveals the deepest truth about reality: love is stronger than death, mercy triumphs over judgment, and God is for us, not against us. That is a significance worth pondering—today and every day—beyond calendar disputes.
116 comments:
Thank you for this. I think you nailed it. It’s a home run. When we try to apply an exacting chronological approach to the Passion we fail to see the forest because of the trees. And if we use that approach as a validation of our doctrine and theological wisdom and understanding we miss the mark. Our own blindness and arrogance can blind us to the profound significance of what Jesus did as our Passover lamb. He came to serve. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am humble and lowly……..As Jesus also said; he who desires to be great among you, let him be your servant. And he who desires to be first among you, let him be your slave. The words of Jesus and His Passion have been misunderstood by many down through time, and the Armstrong movement is most certainly not immune from this. He did what we could never do, ever, save us. No works on our part will change that. Happy Pesach to you all.
Mercy does not triumph over judgment. That is wishful thinking. Most people have terrible judgment. In the real world, hate triumphs over truth.
"Looks" like the crucifixion was Friday, April 3, 33 AD by the Julian Calendar. The 3 "days" - Nisan 14,15,16. The 3 "nights" - a few minutes of darkness Friday afternoon after Jesus was put in the tomb, Friday night, Saturday night.
P.S. Where did the Friday tradition come from? ...... Friday!!!!!
It was stated in the post that:
“John 19:31 notes it was also before a “high day” (the first day of Unleavened Bread), but this does not require two separate Sabbaths forcing a Wednesday death; the weekly Sabbath itself could be called “high” in context...”
The context is that according to John’s calendar the first day of unleavened bread fell on a Sabbath [the seventh day of the week] so John was saying that that Sabbath was also a holy day - the two coinciding.
Non-atonement holy days are not shabbaths but shabbatons; in this instance the “on” suffix is a diminutive such as “let” in booklet.
As a shabbaton is not as holy as a Sabbath food may be prepared on these days.
While Christ died on a Friday the fourteenth, according to John’s calendar, the fourteenth according to the calendar, should still be observed on which day of the week it occurs; not a yearly Friday commemoration.
Mt 28:1 And after the SABBATHS, in the shining forth to ONE OF THE SABBATHS, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to behold the tomb. (SLT).
Mt 12:1 In that time Jesus went in the SABBATHS through the standing corn and his disciples were hungry, and began to pluck the ears, end eat. (SLT).
And the Pharisees, seeing, said to him, Behold, thy disciples do what is not lawful to do in the SABBATH.
Lk 18:12 I fast twice of the SABBATH; I pay tithes of all I possess.
The singular “sabbath and plural “sabbaths” can be used interchangeably for the seventh day of the week and for the seven day week.
“ONE OF THE SABBATHS” means Sunday the first day of the week or one of the sabbath(s) as the Jews would say.
No where is “sabbaths” used for a sabbat and a sabbaton occurring together.
Mk 6:21 And when a convenient DAY was come, that Herod on his BIRTHDAYS made a supper to his lords, high captains, and chief estates of Galilee;
Mt 22:2 'The reign of the heavens was likened to a man, a king, who made MARRIAGE-FEASTS for his son, (YLT).
Mt 22:8 then saith he to his servants, The MARRIAGE-FEAST indeed is ready, and those called were not worthy, (YLT).
Ex 20:8 Remember the day of the SABBATHS [Gk: sabbaton plural] to sanctity it (singular) (ABP).
Mt 28:1 And after the SABBATHS [Gk sabbaton, plural] (SLT).
“... in the Septuagint the plural is sometimes used where the original Hebrew has the singular, and where it is obvious that the reference is to a single day [Ex 16:25, 26; 20:8, 10; 35:3; Num 15:32, Deut 5:12]. There may be a parallel here to the custom of using the Greek plural for festivals such as the Feast of Dedication (John 10:22), the feast of Unleavened Bread (Mark 14:1), a marriage feast (Matt. 22:2) or a birthday celebration (Mark 6:21)" (Walter F. Specht, "The Sabbath in the New Testament," in The Sabbath in Scripture and History, ed. Kenneth A. Strand, 1982, pp.92-93).
Matt. 20:1-16 is also mildly tangential. The parable of the workers, in which God counts a partial day of labor as a full day for the purpose of giving recompense. Tangential because it further illustrates the nuance we are presently discussing.
It's also important to realize that the Jews interpreted the superlatives contained in their scrolls in a similar manner. "All" as in utterly slay all of the Amalekites, meant "for the most part". Same with things which were to be done or kept for "all times". It was understood as meaning for as long as certain specific conditions continued to exist.
This is yet another reason why we believe the Old Covenant was specifically with and for the Hebrew tribes in the promised land. Time and date stamped, if you will, and It was best understood within the context of their language and their culture. The very act of translating from one language to another is in reality paraphrasing, no matter how careful one might be. Devout ones from earlier eras felt so strongly about this that they actually killed people who translated it, one of whom was William Tyndale. They thought his work not to be of benefit to humanity, but blasphemous. There is a whole bloody history associated with translators of the Bible.
We have thousands of years of relatively uniform history and tradition surrounding Holy Week, and then suddenly Herbert W.Armstrong, or the people whom he plagiarized, swoop down, question it, and attempt to change it all and refer to Christians as "Christians falsely so called" Not been taught in nearly 2,000 years indeed! It's like an old Saturday Night Live skit such as "What if Hitler had won World War II", or "What if the South Had Won the Civil War?"
I tend to think that if Bob Thiel had never heard of Herbert W. Armstrong, his basic personality would have lead him to another contrarian guru. That is just the way some people are wired!
Good work Bob. You are a clown, but you do get some things right.
Some people are wired to follow contrarians. Some people are wired to follow the crowd.
where does it say there was "a few minutes of darkness Friday afternoon after Jesus was put in the tomb"?
So people will have to throw out the gospel of John and John's timeline given in scripture. I'm not aware of any Sabbath being called 'high Sabbath' in scripture unless it was a holy day.
To genuine Sunday observing Christians Easter Sunday without doubt is the main "holy day" to them.
On Good Friday all retail shops and restaurants, cinema's, theatre's ect are open as per their usual business hours, it is Easter Sunday when all retail and major industries shut down for the day.
A preacher told me he does not need to write his own sermons anymore. He can just use AI. So what we can expect is parroting, not inspiration.
Might be an approvement !
An ai written sermon would be based on scripture and therefore not include church politics, in-fighting or false accusations !
And some have faith in God and somehow been noticed by God and are wired to know his voice.
On a recent YouTube podcast I watched, noted scholar and Christian author Michael Heiser said that the Wednesday crucifixion scenario indeed had merit and was considered by many biblical scholars as an acceptable and legitimate alternative. He also covered the luny dating and calculations for determining Easter, the quartodeciman controversy (yes Virginia, that was a real conflict within the early church) and 3 days and 3 nights (it has merjt).
It appears, according to Heiser, that HWA'S views on this was just as good as anyone's. Too bad in typical HWA fashion he made these beliefs requirements for salvation!
If it weren't for this website Bob would be the insignificant little squeak that needs oiling. No wonder he is begging his followers to get him on the Tucker Carlson podcast (if you want to call it that) at any cost. Except using his tithes and offerings.
Eh, you make good arguments that can easily mislead those with little to no understanding. The Church knows better and will not fall for it.
The bible instructs to "prove all things," but it's an ongoing process rather than a one off task. And it's typically by middle age that most people have acquired the knowledge and maturity to begin seriously challenging what they have been taught. Which is why most religious dissidents on YouTube are older people. So following the crowd by acting on the premise that they are probably right is unavoidable in one's youth.
I would be grateful if you could find a link to that video you mentioned.
It doesn't say. The thought is extrapolated after considering the correct translation of Luke 23:54.........and the sabbath (Nisan 14, the 1st day of UB) ...."drew on"?....drew nigh?......was approaching? (Strong's 1448, eggizo)????
No.
......the sabbath began to grow light....Strong's 2020, epiphosko. After Jesus was put in the tomb - verse 53.
If Bobby boy is desirous of appearing on the Tucker Carlson podcast then that is a new low, even by the LOW standards of the Armstrong movement lol.
And yes I agree, if it wasn’t for this website Bobby boy would be an unknown.
It is funny how people invoke God before they go to war. You have to wonder what God they believe in. You have to wonder if the war is a religious war.
At one point, several years ago, I was hanging out a lot in a local Berean Christian Bookstore. They stocked a number of items for members of the clergy as well as for individual Christians. Amongst these items were books containing sermon outlines. These initially caused me to wonder about the entire inspiration element as it applied to "canned" sermons, but as I considered their existence more in detail, I realized that inspiration happens on a personal level, often involves reference materials and that these outlines are simply another reference material to which inspiration would attach. I suppose that AI sermons would also work well with inspiration, but seriously doubt that they would be of value to Armstrongite ministers. The words, thoughts, and theories of Herbert W Armstrong are still taken by members as being the quintessential inspiration directly from quasi-Biblical character, "God's Apostle", and are the supreme modifier in the lives of his followers.
I also enjoyed perusing the collection of Christian jewelry. One item which piqued my interest was a Messianic necklace, with the charm being a gold Star of David with a Cross superimposed. My thoughts went back to the time during which I was living out my sentence in the WCG and I thought "Wow! Wouldn't it have been great if we had had cool identity stuff like this to wear back then?" And then I remembered the outrage Bob Thiel had expressed when the surrounding community lovingly placed their crosses at the temporarily created memorial site following the Terry Ratzman rampage.
BB
Bob most likely bears some similarity to most people who post on websites and blogs. He wants to see reactions to his ideas. In a perverse sort of way, he most likely derives some pleasure even from the bad reactions. In his distorted perspectives, he probably even sees in us people who will soon be punished for deriding his "truths". In his mind, "Boy, are they (us) ever going to be finding out!"
I do believe we are one of several factors in his continued motivation. Sadly for him, it's all spiritual masturbation. He's simply fantasizing, only there is never any relief. That is the elusive part.
"Rigid, overly literal reading of 3 days and 3 nights"? What's not clear about 3 days and 3 nights? If you don't know how to translate this, how can you know if God is being literal when He gives you a commandment? As for all the "3rd day" references, of course they fit the Fr--Sun narrative IF you are pushing a Fri crucifixion.
You people are fooled by the translators who were Catholics. If they translated Pascha into Easter that tells you what their mindset was, i.e. that they were prepared to lead you towards a Friday-Sunday conclusion in support of the Easter doctrine, even though there is no proof of a Sunday morning resurrection, the tomb being open at the time (depending on the source), after a couple of hours of light, plus 2 nights and a day, which doesn't add up to 72 hours.
A Friday crucifixion does align with the fact that a Sabbath was to follow so it was easy (for Easter proponents) to call the regular Sabbath a high day when it really wasn't. One question to ask if one does the research is, was there a Sab-Fri UB festival that year in 31 AD? (Some believe it was 33 AD but I believe they are wrong) A Sab-Fri festival rarely occurs, if at all, under the postponements as far as I know, which would make the biblical narrative an incorrect one. It would place LUB on a Friday and not allow for preparation for the regular Sabbath of the following week. For you who think that this doesn't matter, that is irrelevant because Fri is called a prep day for the Sabbath.
There is more to consider. For example, the women had to prepare the ointments. Under a Fri-Sun scenario, would there have been enough time to do it (buy and prepare) before Sabbath? They were running out of time, watched as the body was entombed, ran back to the city to prepare for the NTBMO, still being in shock, resting on Sabbath, leaving early Sun morning, and finding no body in the tomb while it was still dark.
Also, Mark says that they bought the ointments AFTER the Sabbath was past. (Were shops open on Saturday night?) Luke says it was done before. John says only Mary came first to the tomb. Luke says a few women came together to the tomb. Matthew says two women came to the tomb.
The gospel accounts don't fully agree and they don't indicate when he rose from the dead but this fact shouldn't affect our faith that God raised Him from the dead, even though the details are shrouded in mystery in order to confuse you. (2 Thess 2:7)
I guess this could be in the maundy thursday thread also.
Bawana, the worldwide, and most all of the offshoots do not observe the feast like it is commanded. They use different names, but observe the bread and wine on a different day in almost every case. That is only one thing. Like several of the other feast days, they misunderstood / misunderstand different things on the feasts that lead to error in different ways, whether it is timing or what the day is representing. They mess up lots of other parts of the Torah.
Now for questions.
Why did the apostles continue observing the feast days after the ascension of the Messiah to the right hand of the Father? (Acts 12, Acts 15, Acts 20 in Jerusalem - not some catholic pentecost as that group did not yet exist, I Corinthians 11 - yes the Passover is mentioned. Doesn't mean bread and wine are only for that feast)?
Those who are of Israel (really all, but Jews if you want to stick with that) are commanded to observe these days throughout their generations (Leviticus 23 remembering Matthew 5:16-20). Why do you never say that and why does Matthew apply differently to gentiles and israel and where is the history?
Please answer with scripture and not opinion. It is obvious that the wcg did not know the instructions of the Creator and herbie and the herbsters were / are evil with even those being mistreated carrying some responsibility for their own error of following that crap. Basically, the only thing they understood / understand correctly for the most part was that the law of God has not passed. Other than that, they had or have gross error all over the place. They knew a bit more than the sda groups who are basically in the same shape. The protestants and catholics are the same with some more error for the most part. Seriously, instead of your speculation (feelings), where is this is the Bible?
Why write perversion for no reason? And you have the gall to call Herbert an pervert.
You reveal much of what dwells on your own mind, and what you really are about, whilst wrongly patronising others to be as low as yourself.
Of course it does have merit BP8. This argument over Jesus not being three days and three nights in the grave only grips followers of Joe Tkach Snr of a certain age range. It has no interest to others not in that sphere or age range.
I recall in 90's a church that split up over eating/not eating mushrooms! What is a life and death argument to some over religion holds zero sway on others.
xHWA
I'm having trouble with the link (it's my junk tablet), but if you go on YouTube and look up the podcaster you can find it.
Podcaster: Dance Like David
Title: Mindblowing: Chuck Missler and Michael Heiser reveal the Truth about Easter
It's actually Missler who covers the Easter misconceptions while Heiser gives an excellent summation on Revelation 1:18, the meaning of Christ's victory over death. Both acknowledge that it is the meaning of the event that should take priority and not the misconceptions. Unlike HWA who did the very opposite.
The pre-occupation with what happened when during the Passover season when Christ was crucified widely misses the mark. The Biblical account is about the meaning of the crucifixion and not the chronology of events. The chronology is important only if you believe that you must imitate that chronology as an important behavior on the critical path to salvation. I believe this is how Armstrongists see it. They have salvation because they have the right timeline. Others are excluded from salvation because they do not have the right timeline. Figuring out the right timeline is, in this context, a “works righteousness” merit badge. Yet, in my years as an Armstrongist, I seldom heard the Armstrongist pulpit preach the chronology during these days. That topic lies in a nerdish backwater.
There is a plausible interpretation of the chronology used by mainstream Christianity, if one is interested. If Armstrongists want to play chronology to establish their bona fides as true Christians, they need to back up and take on the really big conundrum. That is the logistics of how the population Israel came out of Egypt during the Biblical timeframe and where they crossed the Red Sea. They can spin their wheels forever on the literal interpretation of that one.
Scout
What? Come on, everybody knows about HWA's "Flog Log"! Still, the main reason I call Herbert a pervert is not that. He earned the label pervert via his activities with his younger daughter Dorothy.
Bob's need to stroke himself in public
People should read the gospels of Thomas and of Judas.
1054
One of the points Church Missler makes is that 1 Corinthians 15:3 says, Christ was raised on the third day according to the scriptures. Where exactly is that found in the OT? Some point to Hosea 6:2, but the fact is, only Jonah gives the divinely authorized sign that Jesus Himself points to, which is 3 days and 3 nights. While it is true that a third day may be a part of 3 days including 2 nights, the terms "AFTER 3 days", Mark 8:31, and the sign of Jonah cannot possibly be so reckoned. All the other terms, " in 3 days", on " the 3rd day" etc. can be reconciled to fit with the 3 days and 3 nights.
Bullinger's Companion Bible nails this all down (see Appendixes 144, 148, 156, 165, 166).
Thoughtful observations, 10:54, however, you may want to go to the Jewish Encyclopedia and read up on the history of the Hebrew calendar. The first century was pre-Hillel II, and the calendar of the first century was still observational, compiled by the priests and approved by the Sanhedrin on a daily basis using the reports of special observers. Think of it in terms of the observation of the wave sheaf and counting off to Pentecost. Nisan is a derivative of the Hebrew word Nitzan, which means bud, appropriate as a name for the first month of the new year. Hillel's calculated calendar was not conceived until the 4th century CE, and reached its modern form in 922-24. This, for the convenience of observant Jews in the diaspora which was set in motion beginning with the destruction of Jerusalem in 69 AD. Following the failure of the Bar Kokhba revolt of 132-136 CE, the Sanhedrin moved to Galilee. It was renamed several times to avoid persecution, but the last universally binding decision of the Great Sanhedrin was in 358 when the calculated (fixed) Hebrew calendar was first established.
The original written calendar records from the first century as compiled on a daily basis by the priests based on daily observations no longer exist. They are gone to antiquity. Attempts to reconstruct the calendar from those years using Hillel's formula in reverse are flawed due to the variables in compiling an observational calendar, such as the first sliver of a new moon not being able to be seen due to weather conditions. An observational calendar will not always correspond directly with a calculated one. There is also controversy regarding the lunar sabbaths of the pre-Hillel era.
Anyone with additional info? Please do share.
BB
1102 asks, "why did the apostles continue observing the feast days after the ascension?
The typical explanation given on this site is, the apostles were Jews living under the terms of the old covenant. That may sound reasonable on the surface, but a couple questions need to be answered, like:
For them ( the apostles), when did the terms of the old covenant end and the terms of the new covenant began? And
How did they understand the teaching of Jesus? Didn't His teachings have new covenant significance and ramifications?
These questions are critical, because 10 years AFTER the resurrection and ascension, after what was nailed to the cross was nailed there, and after the middle wall was broken down, we find Peter still observing the laws of the clean and unclean (Acts 10), the apostles still keeping the days of Torah, and the apostle Paul teaching Gentile Corinthians out of the law of Moses (ch. 5, 9). Either these guys didn't learn anything from Jesus, they misunderstood Him, they were confused about the " covenants", OR our assumptions about said events are faulty and need overhauled. I believe it's the latter.
Any group believes Ex 23:14-16 by the Jewish Calendar? Certainly not Armstrong and splinters.
Re your last pgh, how do YOU explain it, 7 am? You can't imagine 1 or 2 million walking, say 10-15 m/day to the edge of the wilderness over 5 days or so, while making roughly 3 stops before getting to the sea coast?
"You people are fooled by the translators who were Catholics"
What Catholics? Tyndale and the KJV translators (both of which used "Easter" in their translations) were not.
They have not been cannonised for specific reasons and can have several versions. When did Judas write his gospel ? Just before he hung himself ?
It's similar situation to those who pushed the "book of knowledge" about 15 years ago, as being a lost book from scripture. It has ten versions. Which version do you pick as the authentic one ?
11:13 was not bob.
Depends "Scout" on what WCG splinter a person belonged or belongs to. And to whom a person listened to.
Ronald L Dart and others, in decades past, repeatedly preached sermons going over the logistics and miracles God performed in getting the Hebrews out of Egypt. Non COG Historians and Egyptianologists have similar explanations.
I would say arguing over three days and three nights timeframe is the nerdy-ist argument I have ever heard in my life. For you leave Jesus out and the prevailing events that surrounded his crucixfiction and the culture of the day, to argue for arguing sake to prove a point you have no intention of changing.
There had been three hours of darkess over Jerusalem whilst Jesus died. We have no idea the after effect that had on Jerusalem or how wide God the Father spread the darkness throughout the land. It would have brought the Passover lamb slaughter to a halt. The curtain splitting in two would have caused great panic in the Temple.
The priests might have temporary shut the entire temple complex whilst they investigated what was going on by candlelight. The resurrected saints could have caused tremendous panic, shock, joy. No-one alive now really knows the full situation until the marriage supper of the lamb.
The culture of Jerusalem was to lock the gates of the garden tombs area of a night. We assume the shops stayed open during the three hours of darkness. We assume the ressurected saints didn't affect the 'spice shop' We assume alot.
No I can't imagine that. That many people might make a half mile or so with a lot of confusion and some people being left behind. Just crossing the floor of the Red Sea for that many people is well-nigh impossible.
Just doesn't compute.
Scout
Anonymous 2:33
The arithmetic is inexorable. Remember the formula D= R x T. Distance equals rate multiplied by time. In this case, if D is large and T is small then R must be supernaturally large. Yet, there is no account in Exodus of R being supernaturally large. There are other supernatural events such as the water standing like a wall and the sea bottom made dry. The sea floor would also have to be smoothed. But there is nothing dealing with locomotion per se. There is no record of the Israelites boarding up on anti-gravity sleds and being whisked over the requisite distance.
I believe that the Red Sea account is likely a case of “God let his children tell the story.” In the NT, where it really counts, the Red Sea crossing is an account of faith (Hebrews) and baptism (Corinthians).
I believe God can make anything happen. He creates reality. This is not a question about whether or not God is absolute. It is a question about the role and reading of the ancient Hebrew texts we call the Old Testament. Did the authors record the data with such comprehensiveness and fidelity that we can parse it like zealous engineering students. I think not. That’s not its purpose.
Scout
From 1-2 million estimate but a more realistic number of 600,000 sounds reasonable over 430 years from the initial 70 family members. We do not know the average lifespan of the Hebrew slaves whilst in Egypt.
The Israelites knew God wanted them out OUT ! of Egypt. How that was going to happen they did not know. But they had at least ten days to prepare.
Do people really think a slave people, who had eaten a lamb in haste! with their loins girded and their sandles on their feet went to bed, snored their heads off, woke up and only started to depart Egypt at 7 a.m ?
Good comments above, BP8. As for Scout, why do you keep blaspheming? One moment you say, "God can do anything". Next moment you say, "it's not possible".
Israel was under orders to get out. They had extra motivation when the Egyptians came running for their heads. The Lord sent a strong wind to dry up the sea bottom. Maybe impossible for some to believe, depending on where you fix your starting and ending points, but they made it across (defying your logic), and even managed to make some inscriptions in stone at Serabit El Khadem on the other side.
1:55 wonders if the sacrificing still went on during the 3 hours of darkness. Well, he answers his own question when he says that the priests investigated under CANDLELIGHT. (Melito of Sardis wrote that they kept celebrating even while the Lord was being crucified) He also says that we have "no idea" how widespread the darkness was. Oh, yes, we do, in Roman and Chinese records I believe. This was not just a localized event with limited social repercussions. As for the resurrection of dead saints, there is a question as to when it happened, before or after the crucifixion? Mt 27 seems to imply that the graves cracked open AFTER the Lord gave up the ghost but that they rose up AFTER He had come back to life again.
Right, BP8, most of the English renderings re "3rd day" can be rendered in support of either a 72 hour entombment or a less than 72. Good quote re Mk 8:31, which affirms that after 3 (full) days He would rise again. The other doubtful renderings are the work of the Protestant ministers who translated the KJ. They don't make it clear. The Fri-Sun proponents argue vociferously for a 39 hour entombment but they won't let others start the 3 day count from Thursday in order to support a Sabbath resurrection. Too Jewish an argument for them, I suppose, even though the Lord said that He is Lord of the Sabbath. (Come to think of it, I can't ever recall in all my time in the church anyone mention that the Lord rose on the Sabbath!)
Great post at 9:33, BP8. Good job. Finally someone sensible.
Couple of questions for BP8, concerning these Scriptures:
Lk 24:18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
Lk 24:19 And he said unto them, WHAT THINGS? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
Lk 24:20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
Lk 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, today is the third day since these things were done.
What is the ‘thing’ or “things” and what is the day the ‘things’ or “things” are counted from?
Lev 19:6 It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the morrow: and if aught remain until the third day, it shall be burnt in the fire.
Using Lev 19:6 it would suggest that the day thing/things were counted from would be Friday.
Lk 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Mt 27:63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
Mt 27:64 Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day,
If Theophilus was unaware of what was recorded in Matthew, what would he have thought was/were the thing/things and the day from which the count should be begin?
Lk 24:19 Concerning JESUS OF NAZARETH, WHICH WAS A PROPHET
Lk 9:22 Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be SLAIN, AND BE RAISED THE THIRD DAY.
Lk 24:21b today is THE THIRD DAY SINCE THESE THINGS WERE DONE.
For me the account with Cleopas was deliberately recounted to confirm that Jesus was a prophet, confirming that his ‘prophecy’ to “be slain, and be raised the third day” was fulfilled.
Lev 23:11 And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.
1 Cor 5:7b For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
Slain Friday and raised Sunday fulfilling typology.
IT IS WRITTEN
Dt 8:3b that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. (LXX).
Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, IT IS WRITTEN, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Lk 24:46 and said to them, “Thus IT IS WRITTEN, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, (ESV).
Lk 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, THAT ALL THINGS MUST BE FULFILLED, WHICH WERE WRITTEN IN THE LAW OF MOSES, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, CONCERNING ME.
Lk 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
Just emphasizing:
Jesus said that IT IS WRITTEN that he “should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead”.
I've read a fair few of his books and you tube commentaries and his own podcasts over the years.
Likely fair to say that Heiser had a view people over‑interpret the phrase “three days” as if it must mean a literal 72 hours. He uses a modern analogy: when someone says “three days ago,” they don’t calculate exact hours. He applies this to the Gospel writers. That is different to the Wednesday‑crucifixion argument, which depends on a rigid 72‑hour count.
When I read /listened to his podcasts and writings his position seems to be that he never taught a Wednesday crucifixion as such - and said a “three days and three nights” is a Semitic idiom. His default assumption was the traditional Friday chronology unless the text forced otherwise
It seems he merely reflected that many saw merit in the Wednesday theory and he discussed their reasons. .
Anonymous 4:27 wrote, "As for Scout, why do you keep blaspheming? One moment you say, "God can do anything". Next moment you say, "it's not possible".
Seeking the correct interpretation of scripture is not blaspheming. Because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean that they are blaspheming. Because Jews engage in midrash does not mean they are blaspheming.
This is not difficult to understand. Please try. All things are possible to God. What actually happened, however, is a different story. Whether or not the Bible provides comprehensive data on a topic is another story. How that data is interpreted by vested interests is another story. My belief is that the Bible does not give us enough data to parse out an ironclad interpretation of what events were surrounding the crossing of the Red Sea and the Crucifixion. Nor do I think dates and days and numbers are on the critical path to salvation as many Armstrongists do. The fact that you claim certainty when you really don't know may well approach being a blasphemy.
Scout
Candleight and fabric woven and embroidered as the veil was, don't mix well together.
So the priests charged in to an area previously forbidden and everything continued as normal.....
Yer prolly right, 1:23, because you are 11:13! If you are, you obviously never attended AC'dena, or you would have taken Uncle Roddie's First Year Bible Class, in which case you would have known that the man was incapable of giving a sermon or class lecture without touching upon (no pun intended) the subject of masturbation. I, on the other hand (again, no pun intended) rarely mention that topic (perversion as you call it) unless it is somehow appropriate, or juices up (OK, maybe pun finally intended) the particular subject at hand (oh crap, there we go again, sorry!). I did get a kick out of Minnie Jocelyn Elders, however, not because of what she advocated teaching teenagers, but because she once said that she liked the music of Eric Clapner! I suppose one really is not required to get the name right of one's faves to enjoy the music, but alas, perhaps I'm just too forgiving!
It was noted above that:
“While it is true that a third day may be a part of 3 days including 2 nights, the terms "AFTER 3 days", Mark 8:31, and the sign of Jonah cannot possibly be so reckoned.”
“Good quote re Mk 8:31, which affirms that after 3 (full) days He would rise again.”
The problem as I see it is one of applying modern western logic to ancient near eastern literature and drawing the wrong conclusion; and this is illustrated where (full) is supplied in the second quote.
The parallel accounts in Matthew and Luke have “and be raised again the third [tritÄ“s] day.” (Cp. Mk 8:31, 34 with Mt 16: 21, 24 and Luke 9:22, 23).
So after three days can’t mean after three full days; the idioms mean the same thing; used interchangeably.
If using a sunrise to sunrise day, an event at noon can be said to have happened on the third day and after three days.
“In Jewish communal life part of a day is at times reckoned as one day; e.g., THE DAY OF THE FUNERAL, EVEN WHEN THE LATTER TAKES PLACE LATE IN THE AFTERNOON, IS COUNTED AS THE FIRST OF THE SEVEN DAYS OF MOURNING; A short time in the morning of the seventh day is counted as the seventh day; CIRCUMCISION TAKES PLACE ON THE EIGHTH DAY, EVEN THOUGH OF THE FIRST DAY ONLY A FEW MINUTES REMAINED AFTER THE BIRTH OF THE CHILD, THESE BEING COUNTED AS ONE DAY” (Emil G. Hirsch, Michael Friedländer, Day, jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5007-day).
After three days does not have to mean two 24 hour days followed by part of a third day.
“It was stated: Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah says, day and night each are a term, and part of a term is like the whole...” (sefaria.org/Jerusalem_Talmud_Shabbat.9.3).
“Based on astronomical calculations for the year AD 30, assuming the widely discussed crucifixion date of Friday, April 7 (Passover, 14 Nisan), the sunset in Jerusalem occurred at approximately 6:20 PM local time” (AI).
If say Jesus was put in the tomb at 5pm and sunset was 6:20 pm, that 80 minutes would be counted as a full day.
There is no evidence that I am aware of that the Hebrews counted a literal three days and three nights from say 5pm, with a sunset at 6:20 pm, as three days and three nights to 5pm three days later using modern-western reckoning, or four days latter using ancient near-eastern reckoning. I suggest it would be a foreign concept to them.
“The entire scheme is based upon the twisted interpretation of a single Bible text. The "three days and three nights” phrase is forced into artificial conformity with current English forms of speech, instead of the common usage of the people living at that time” (Joe Crews, Three Days and Three Nights, amazingfacts.org).
Part 2
A parallel can be seen in counting parts of years as full years:
“Mishnah Rosh HaShanah, chapter 1
“(1) There are four New Years. On the first of Nissan is the [cut off date for the] New Year regarding [the count of the reigns of the Jewish] kings [which was used to date legal documents. IF A KING BEGAN HIS REIGN IN ADAR EVEN IF WAS ONLY FOR ONE DAY THAT IS CONSIDERED HIS FIRST YEAR, AND FROM THE FIRST OF NISSAN IS CONSIDERED HIS SECOND YEAR, thus one would write: “On the First of Nissan, in the second year of the reign of King so and so,”] and [the Festival which is in Nissan, namely Pesah is also the beginning of the count for] the [three] Festivals...” (emishnah.com/moed2/Rosh_HaShanah/1.pdf).
“In reference to matters of detail, the following points may be noted: 1. The custom of reckoning a portion of the calendar year in the beginning and end of a year, be it ever so small, as a full year in the reign, did undoubtedly exist in Egypt. Not only the years of the Ptolemies, but also the years of the Roman emperors, were in Egypt numbered in this manner (Ideler, Handbuch der Chronologie, i. 17 ff; Mommsen, Romisches Staatsrecht, 1. Aufl. ii, 2, 758 ff.). In reference to the similar style of reckoning the years of the Jewish kings by Josephus, see Gumpach, pp. 223-236...” (Emil Schurer, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, First Division, Volume 1, pp.465-66).
"Having seen what we know, we now need to look at what we may be assuming erroneously... WE MAY BE ASSUMING THAT FIRST-CENTURY JEWS THOUGHT ABOUT TIME IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE DO. In fact they did not. Any part of a day could be counted as if it were a full day, much as in Canada and the U.S.A. a child is deductible for income-tax purposes at the full year rate even if he or she was born at 11 p.m. on December 31. The "three days and three nights," then may simply refer to three twenty-four hour days (sunset to sunset periods), and Jesus was in fact in the tomb parts of three different days..." (Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Peter H. Davids, F. F. Bruce, Manfreed T. Brauch, Hard Sayings of the Bible, pp.380-381).
Scout makes a valid point at 839. He writes, "the Bible does not give us enough data to parse out an ironclad interpretation of what events surrounding . . .the crucifixion".
We have, in 3 days, on the 3rd day, after 3 days, and 3 days and 3 nights, yet for some reason we can't reconcile these statements to everyone's satisfaction. We are quick however to label contrary opinions as heretical. I personally accept the specific sign Jesus gave and believe the other sayings can be reconciled with it.
Also, 535:
Which scriptures were Paul referring to in 1 Corinthians 15:3, Matthew and Luke's gospel account (no), or the one's referenced by Jesus in Luke 24:44-45, the old testament? Think about it.
#1. I repeat, there is no proof that He rose at dawn, since the tomb was already open at that early morning hour. Therefore, you can't include daylight Sunday in your computations to present a "He rose on the 3rd day" argument. I marvel at you people who argue for facts but blindly give in to speculation and tradition when you have to settle on something, while accusing us of guesswork.
2. The quote from Joe Crews is useless. He doesn't like Mk 8:31 because it doesn't fit his tradition. "After", meta, is used here, a common word, but he has to twist it because it twists his theory too much. I'm surprised that the Protestant translators didn't touch this one as they did with Heb 4:9, where "rest" is a more palatable word than "Sabbath-keeping", and "Easter" is a more appropriate translation for "Pascha".
3. Now I see why the exact time of the resurrection is so obscure, because the Lord knew that many would come along and "change timings, dates and laws" (Dan 7:25) re His sign of 3 days in the heart of the earth, and that these changes would be instituted by the counterfeit Christian tradition as predicted in Dan 7:25.
Brother BP8, you ask which scriptures Paul was referring to in 1 Cor 15:3? Come on, you don't know what season we're in? You haven't read Ps 34:20, Zech 12:10, Is 53, Is 50:6,Ps 16:10, 49:15, 68:18, 22:1,7&17, 41:9, 69:9? It wasn't all about timing.
4. I laugh at some of you people because it was the Jews and Romans (the ones who crucified Him) who knew more about these events than they were willing to admit publically. (However there were believers, like Nicodemus, Joseph of Aramathaea, and Roman members who knew what really happened and shared it with those who were trustworthy)
5. Is someone going to look up the date of the new moon and vernal equinox of 31 AD in order to find the date of the crucifixion? I think the Chinese recorded that day as an eclipse in their records. I have Wed Apr 25, 31 AD as Nisan 14 in my notes. Therefore can anyone verify that Apr 12 Thurs was the NM that year?
More to add to the above.
1. Someone above quoted from a book by Crews wherein he dismissed the veracity of Mk 8:31 and tried to explain it away, the very words of the Lord who quoted directly from Jonah 1! Easy to dismiss such a false witness. Jonah said, "3 days and 3 nights".
2. Since some of you are fond of traditions, why didn't anyone cite the old Christian tradition of fasting on the Wednesday of the week of the crucifixion, which commemorates the betrayal of the Lord by Judas to the Jews? Here tradition is on my side when it comes to the timing of the crucifixion.
More evidence for you doubters.
Here is Hoeh quoting from Walther:
Astounding proof exists of these attempts to change the days of the resurrection and of the crucifixion. James A. Walther, in an article entitled "The Chronology of Passion Week," in the Journal of Biblical Literature, mentions that numerous Catholic writers for centuries maintained that Jesus ate the Passover Tuesday night — that early Wednesday morning He was taken by the Jewish mob.
Mr. Walther declares: "References in the Didascalia, in Epiphanius, in Victorinus of Pettau ... support the Tuesday [night] Passover dating and the subsequent arrest of Jesus in the morning hours of Wednesday."
There's some research for you.
BP8 writes:
Also, 535:
Which scriptures were Paul referring to in 1 Corinthians 15:3, Matthew and Luke's gospel account (no), or the one's referenced by Jesus in Luke 24:44-45, the old testament? Think about it.
I will answer your question after you answer my two questions, as I asked them first.
What is the ‘thing' or "things" and what is the day the ‘things' or "things" are counted from?
If Theophilus was unaware of what was recorded in Matthew, what would he have thought was/were the thing/things and the day from which the count should be begin?
Lk 24:46 and said to them, "Thus IT IS WRITTEN, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, (ESV).
I hope you believe what Jesus is recorded as saying.
"We are quick however to label contrary opinions as heretical"
For the record I have never said any contrary opinion to what I believe is heretical.
Anonymous 10:48 asks:
I have Wed Apr 25, 31 AD as Nisan 14 in my notes. Therefore can anyone verify that Apr 12 Thurs was the NM that year?
Parker and Dubberstein have April 12 as the first of Nisan:
https://webspace.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/babylon/downloads/babylonian_chronology_pd_1956.pdf.
Anonymous 10:48 writes:
“The quote from Joe Crews is useless. He doesn't like Mk 8:31 because it doesn't fit his tradition. "After", meta, is used here, a common word, but he has to twist it because it twists his theory too much.”
Mark 8:31 has “after [meta] three [treis] days”; while Matthew and Luke have “the third [tritÄ“s] day” in their account of the parallel accounts.
Mk 8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and AFTER [META] THREE [TREIS] DAYS rise again.
Mk 8:34 And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and TAKE UP HIS CROSS, and follow me.
Mt 16:21 From that time forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again THE THIRD [TRITÄ’S] DAY.
Mt 16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and TAKE UP HIS CROSS, and follow me.
Lk 9:22 Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised THE THIRD [TRITÄ’S] DAY.
Lk 9:23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and TAKE UP HIS CROSS daily, and follow me.
How do you reconcile the two phrases?
April 3 11:10
Not in Oz. Here on Goo Friday everything is shut. But on Easter Sunday things are open.
"You can read the Old Testament as carefully and as often as you want — standing on your head, backwards, with special decoder glasses, or in Klingon — and you won't find anything about a future messiah dying and rising from the dead on the third day, the very thing Jesus says you will find there. Not a word” (Peter Enns, The Bible Tells Me So..., p. 202).
But.
“All of us who are acquainted with the Bible are aware that the NT authors frequently appeal to OT passages to make a theological point, to confirm a prophetic fulfillment, or to ground one ethical exhortation or another... But when we actually pick up the text and try to make sense of how the NT authors are reading the OT text, we quickly find ourselves asking, “Whare are we supposed to do with this?”
“For instance, some of the OT passages that are “fulfilled” in the NT don’t look at all like predictions in their original contexts. Others that do look like predictions often appear to have been fulfilled in events that happened or in people who lived far earlier than Jesus. In addition, theological affirmations in the OT are occasionally restated with a new and distinct reference. In sum, the meaning that the NT writers derive from the Scriptures often appear inconsistent with what their OT counterparts intended. As we encounter these tensions, what we actually are sensing is the interpretative distance that exists between the writers of the NT and us...
“What complicates things further is that the NT authors seem to take their cues from Jesus’ own approach to the Scriptures. In the estimation of countless students of the Bible (including the two editors of this volume), one of the most tantalizing passaged in the NT is Luke 24:13-35. While accompanying the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, the risen but unrecognized Jesus chastises his traveling companions for not comprehending that the prophets had pointed to the necessity of the Messiah’s suffering prior to his entrance into glory (vv. 25-26). Luke then summarizes Jesus’ expression in verse 27: “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.”
“What did Jesus say to them? Which Scriptures did he discuss? How did the Scriptures point to the necessity of his death and glorification? What method did he use to move from the Scriptures to himself?... Luke does not preserve for us the specifics of Jesus’ instruction...” (Kenneth Berding & Jonathan Lunde, gen eds., “Three Views on the New testament Use of the Old Testament,” pp. 7-9).
“Since the NT writers assume that Jesus is the Lord’s Messiah’s who also sums up both Israel’s and humanity’s roles in history, patterns in his life and ministry that correspond in some way to events, institutions, groups, and individuals in the OT are characterized as “fulfillment of the Scriptures...”
“For instance, John’s typological perspective enables him to state that the nonbreaking of Jesus’ legs in John 19:36 “fulfills” the Scriptures pertaining to the treatment of the Passover lamb’s body (Ex 12:46; Num 9:12). Similarly Matthew can affirm that the travels of Jesus and his parents to and from Egypt “fulfill” Hosea 11:1 and its description of Israel’s exodus from Egypt (Matt 2:15). In Romans 9:25-26, Paul can point to the conversion of the Gentiles to faith in Jesus as the fulfillment of the promises made in Hosea 1:10 and 2:23 concerning the Northern Kingdom’s return to a covenantal relationship with God after the exile to Assyria. So also does a typlological perspective permit John the Baptist in John 1:23 identify himself as the forerunner announcing the fulfillment of Isaiah’s vision of the return of the Southern Kingdom from Babylon (Isa 40:3) over five centuries after its initial fulfillment. The list goes on and on” (Kenneth Berding & Jonathan Lunde, gen eds., “Three Views on the New testament Use of the Old Testament,” pp. 20-21).
Part 2
“It is well known that ancient Jewish groups prior to and contemporaneous with the first-century Christian Jews were perceiving fulfillments of the OT in events and people from those put forward in the NT. The interpretations of Scripture found at Qumran illustrate this well. As is revealed in their writings, these sectarian Jews were convinced of their identity as the “children of light,” faithful to the covenants and the rightful heirs of many of scriptural prophecies concerning the last days of the age. Equipped with their hermeneutical key — which is none other than their Teacher of Righteousness — they saw in their own history the fulfillment of end time prophecies. Accordingly, they unhesitatingly applied the Scriptures to their own community.
“What is important to recognize is that is analogous to what the NT authors have done in their use of the OT. Equipped with Jesus, who is their interpretive key, they approach the Scriptures to validate their claim that Jesus is the Messiah and to bolster their assertions concerning their own identity and destiny. Like the Qumranians, they view Scripture through the lens of their presuppositions about Jesus...” (Kenneth Berding & Jonathan Lunde, gen eds., “Three Views on the New testament Use of the Old Testament,” pp. 20-21).
Mt 2:5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet,
Mt 2:17 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying,
Mk 15:28 And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.
“Untutored Christians are prone to think of prophecy and fulfillment as something not very different from straightforward propositional prediction and fulfillment. A close reading of the NT reveals that prophecy is more complex than that. The Epistle to the Hebrews, for instance, understands the Levitical sacrificial system to be prophetic of Christ’s sacrifice, Melchizedek to point to Jesus as High Priest, and so on. In Matthew we are told that Jesus’ return from Egypt fulfills the OT text that refers to the Exodus (2:15); the weeping of the mothers of Bethlehem fulfills Jeremiah’s weeping for her children in Rama; the priests’ purchase of a field for thirty pieces of silver fulfills Scriptures describing actions performed by Jeremiah and Zechariah ([Mt] 27:9); and, in one remarkable instance, Jesus move to Nazareth fulfills “what was said through the prophets” even no specific text appears in mind (2:23)” (D. A. Carson, Matthew, EBC, Vol. 8, p. 27).
“Many have noticed that Jesus is often presented in the NT as the antitype of Israel, or better, the typological recapitulation of Israel. Jesus temptation after forty days of fasting recapitulated the forty years’ trial of Israel... When David was appointed king, the tribes acknowledged him as their bone and flesh (2 Sam 5:1), i.e., David as anointed king summed up Israel, with the result that his sin brought disaster on his people (2 Sam 12, 24). Just as Israel is God’s son, so the promised Davidic Son is also Son of God (2 Sam 7:13-14);...).... “Fulfillment” must be understood against this background of these interlocking themes and their typological connections” (D. A. Carson, Matthew, EBC, Vol. 8, pp. 91-92).
Part 3
With the above in mind the Scriptures Jesus could have had in mind in claiming that “it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day”:
Exodus 12:6 And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: AND THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY OF THE CONGREGATION OF ISRAEL SHALL KILL IT IN THE EVENING.
(Lk 23:13 And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people,
Lk 23:21 But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him).
Ex 12:46 neither shall ye break a bone thereof.
(John 19:36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken).
Psalm 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
(Ac 2:31 Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay).
Hosea 6:2 "After two days he will revive us; on the third [tritos, LXX] day he will raise us up..."
“The fundamental OT passage on resurrection in the first century, however, as Hos. 6:1f. Hosea spoke about the national revival by God of a contrite and repentant Israel... By the first century the passage had come to be interpreted eschatologically of the consolation of Israel in last days, sealed by resurrection. The interpretation is reflected in the Targum read in the synagogue in connection with the call to repentance in preparation for the Day of Atonement:
“They will say: Come, and let us return to the service of the Lord; for he who has smitten us will heal us; and he who has brought ruin upon us will give us rest.
He will revive us on the days of consolation which are about to come:
On the day of the resurrection of the dead he will raise us up and we shall be revived before him.”
“Reflection upon the interpretation of Hos. 6:2, also may have informed Jesus’ conviction concerning his resurrection “after three days.” While there is some evidence that “after three days” can be regarded in a Semitic context as equivalent to “on the third day” (Gen. 42:17f; 2 Chron. 10:2, 12, it is probable that Jesus’ reference to three days was an indefinite expression for a short period of time. A conviction, grounded upon Scripture, was that “the Holy One, blessed be he, does not leave his own in distress for more than three days [Midrash Tehillim on Ps. 22:5...]” (William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, NICNT, pp. 302-03).
Key Prophetic Scriptures by David (Psalm 22 & Others):
Psalm 22:1: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46, Mark 15:34).
Ps 22:7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, (Mt 27:39)
Ps 22:8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him (Matthew 27:43).
Psalm 22:18: "They divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots" (Matthew 27:35, John 19:23-24).
Psalm 34:20: "He guards all his bones; Not one of them is broken" (John 19:36).
Psalm 41:9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me (Jn 13:18).
Christotelicity as a phenomenon that we cannot shape and form ourselves. Why do we even have expectations? The hermeneutic that a number of commentors on this issue follow seems to be:
“If the OT conveys a prophecy about Jesus, it must conform to how I want it to be done.”
Lots of luck on that. The real hermeneutic is this pre-emptive one written by the author of Hebrews:
“Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds” (Hebrews 1:1, NRSV)
I know the Hebrews 1:1 hermeneutic is hard to accept if you are bound to the OT text and your hobby is parsing it, but Jesus is the Word of God. God has spoken (speaks) to us through Jesus. The leitmotif of Hebrews is that something new has come about. We now have the Word of God 2.0. The insertion of the “third day” in Luke 24:46 may not be referential but editorial. The detail of the “third day” may not be encoded somewhere in the OT. It may have been an inline, ad hoc enhancement provided by Jesus. After all, he is the master of Christotelicity.
So, if you cleave doggedly to the self-imposed idea that, “I must find the ‘third day’ in the OT or there is something wrong with the scripture,” like our atheist brothers, you just might be hunting a snipe.
Scout
If you want to get into the important event of the Crucifixion, look at a book written by Fleming Rutledge titled The Crucifixion. It runs almost 600 pages and there is no discussion of the timeline. My impression is that if Armstrongists were to turn out a something on the Crucifixion, it would be a booklet that discusses little more than the timeline. It's what Dean Blackwell called majoring in the minors.
Scout
Part 1 (had to split it into 3 parts like MPM)
For me I've come to learn over the last decade now that the doctrine taught by HWA/WCG and its offshoots—that Christ was crucified on Wednesday, rose on Saturday and entombed for exactly 72 hours—is completely false. Ironically, his own favorite line about other Christians—"They are sincere, but they are sincerely wrong"—applies just as well to him and his followers.
Here are 14 reasons why, for me, this teaching doesn't hold up:
1. "Three days and three nights" is essentially a Biblical idiom meaning three days not a literal 72-hour period. This type of expression—indicating a full, complete span rather than precision timing—appears elsewhere in the Bible (Gn 7:12; Ex 24:18; 1 Sm 30:12–13; 2 Chr 10:5, 12; Jb 2:13; Est 4:16-17; 5:1; Jon 1:17; Mt 4:2). The sole passage that uses the phrase, "three days and three nights," is Mt 12:40. The parallel account only mentions Christ being a sign to this "evil generation" like Jonah was to the Ninevites not to any specific time period (Lk 11:29-32).
2. Jesus consistently foretold that He would rise on "the third day" not after a literal 72 hours (Mt 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Mk 9:31; 10:34; Lk 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46; Acts 10:40; 1 Cor 15:4).
3. Expressions like "on the third day," "in three days" (Mt 26:61; 27:40; Mk 15:29; Jn 2:19-20), "after three days" (Mt 27:63; Mk 8:31) and "within three days" (Mk 14:58) are used interchangeably in Scripture to mean the exact same thing: on the third day—not after a precise 72-hour period.
4. The account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus interacting with the resurrected Christ confirms He rose on the third day as it's stated: "to day is the third day since these things were done" (Lk 24:21). "These things" refer to His trial and crucifixion in the preceding verse (v. 20). Counting inclusively, this points to a Friday–Sunday timeline: Friday (day 1), Saturday (day 2), Sunday (day 3).
Part 2 5. Jesus died on the day of Preparation (Mt 27:62; Mk 15:42; Lk 23:54; Jn 19:14, 31, 42), which in Judaic usage has historically referred to the sixth day of the week—Friday, the day before the weekly Sabbath—not Wednesday.
6. The women "prepared spices and ointments" for Christ's burial before resting on the weekly Sabbath day "according to the [fourth] commandment" (Lk 23:54-56). After the Sabbath ended on Saturday night, they likely obtained additional spices (Mk 16:1), which they then brought to the tomb early on Sunday morning—again fitting a Friday burial. Furthermore, if Christ had died on Wednesday with Thursday as the annual Sabbath there would've been time for the women to return to His grave on Friday to anoint His body. It's highly unlikely they'd wait four days to do so, especially since decomposition was understood to have begun by then (Jn 11:17, 39).
7. The apostle John describes the Sabbath following Christ's crucifixion as "an high day" (Jn 19:31). This is when both an annual Sabbath—which was the Feast day (15 Nisan)—coincided with the weekly Sabbath. There weren't two separate Sabbaths that week.
8. Christ's resurrection was early on Sunday (Mk 16:9; Jn 20:1). The timeline spanned three days and was continuous flowing naturally and sequentially: Friday and Preparation day (14 Nisan, Passover); Saturday and both the weekly and annual Sabbath (15 Nisan, Feast of Unleavened Bread); Sunday (16 Nisan, Wavesheaf day).
9. Sunday was the day of the Omer or barley Wavesheaf, which Christ fulfilled in His resurrection as the sheaf (or first) of the "first fruits" perfectly matching the type (Lv 23:10–11; 1 Cor 15:20). This Wavesheaf was offered "the morrow [or day] after the [weekly] sabbath" (Sunday). In the year of His death and resurrection the Omer fell on Sunday 16 Nisan for both Pharisees and Sadducees. Thus, He fulfilled the typology for both Judaic groups: the former always observed the Omer on 16 Nisan (the day after the annual Sabbath of 15 Nisan) while the latter observed it on the day after the weekly Sabbath during the Feast of Unleavened Bread (which that year coincided with 15 Nisan).
Part 3
10. Biblical time reckoning or counting is inclusive in both the OT and NT, that is, today counts as day 1 (Gn 42:17-18; Ex 19:10-11, 15-16; Lv 19:6; 1 Sm 30:12–13; 2 Chr 10:5, 12; Est 4:16-17; 5:1; Lk 1:59; 2:21; 13:32; Acts 10:3-9, 21-24, 30). By contrast, in the modern world we use exclusive counting, that is, today counts as day 0 and tomorrow as day 1.
11. Christ's tomb was sealed and guarded at the end of the weekly Sabbath, just as the third day was shortly to begin (Mt 27:62-66-28:1). The Judaic religious leaders, aware of Christ's prophecy that He would rise on the third day, requested that the Roman authorities secure and guard the tomb as it was about to begin. A better rendering of Mt 27:66-28:1 would be: "So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch in the end of the sabbath. As it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre." This aligns more closely with the other gospel writers, which end with the Sabbath and then mark the start of the third day (Mk 16:2; Lk 24:1; Jn 20:1).
12. The first clear record of the Wednesday crucifixion and Saturday resurrection theory appears in 1724 with a writer named George Carlow, not in early Christianity. It later developed among Sabbatarians and was popularized in the 20th century by Herbert W Armstrong. But, for over 1,700 years, Christians consistently held to a Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection. In other words: this theory never existed in the early church, the medieval church or post-Reformation Christianity making it a modern reinterpretation rather than an ancient or apostolic belief.
13. For centuries the word "Easter" served as the English and Germanic equivalent of Passover, as seen in 16th‑century English Bible translations (see TH Brown's "The use of 'Easter' in Acts 12.4"). In most Romance languages, however, the festival was known as Pascha derived from the Hebrew Pesach. For example, in Italian, it's still called "Pasqua." Tyndale introduced the term "Passover" into English in 1530. Thus, what English speakers call Easter Sunday corresponds to Passover Sunday or Pascha Sunday in other languages, as established by the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE to commemorate Christ's resurrection on the same day universally.
14. The issue isn't so much the name—Passover, Pascha and Easter all refer to the same festival in different languages—but the date. Eastern Christians observed it on 14 Nisan on the Judaic calendar (following Christ and early Church leaders like John, Polycarp and Polycrates; these adherents were historically known as "Quartodecimans"). Western Christians, however, chose to celebrate it on the Sunday after the first full moon on or following the vernal equinox, using the Julian (and later Gregorian) calendar. Thus, it's disingenuous to assert the Christian festival commemorating the resurrection of Christ on "Easter" Sunday is of pagan origin when history proves it's not so much about pagan influence as it is apostasy from apostolic practice.
The Messiah is the Passover sacrifice as well as others.
Treatises on timing during the feast period abound. Some use the scriptures like third day, etc. to overrule more specific ones because they just can't stand what the specific shows. However, they would not like it if someone used that tactic to take advantage of them.
The Messiah gave a sign. He said it was for an evil and adulterous generation. Nevertheless, He gave one. His sign is a contract. When one agrees to a contract with a time on it like a lease, it is binding unless he can break it. That is what men do, but not the Messiah.
The Messiah is different in that there will be no dispute ultimately unlike what can happen these days. It is a done deal. He and the Father already did what was said.
People can argue all they want and it will certainly not be proof for all in this age, but it is done because if He was not in the grave as long as He said, He is a liar and so is the Father. There is no way around that. Ever. His word cannot be dismissed and He knows the length of a day because He said so (12 hours).
That does not in any way make what has been taught by evil people and organizations that happened to get something correct any better or mean that they should be heard. Evil is evil. Mainstream or herbster, both perverts (some literally) teaching a perverted gospel.
I asked a question above which I would like to answer myself, but with the question worded a little differently:
Lk 24:18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known THE THINGS which are come to pass there in these days?
What are ‘these things’ and what day are ‘these things’ counted from?
Lev 19:6 It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the morrow: and if aught remain until the third day, it shall be burnt in the fire.
The answer is based on the acceptance that “the third day” is a Hebrew idiom for “the day after tomorrow;” and the Hebrews used collective counting - compare the count to Pentecost.
Lk 24:18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known THE THINGS WHICH ARE COME TO PASS THERE IN THESE DAYS?
Lk 24:19a And he said unto them, WHAT THINGS?
Lk 24:19b And they said unto him, CONCERNING JESUS OF NAZARETH, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
Cleopas’ answer to Jesus’ question in defining “what things” are:
Lk 24:20 And how the chief priests and our rulers DELIVERED HIM TO BE CONDEMNED TO DEATH, AND HAVE CRUCIFIED HIM.
Cleopas defines “these things” as Jesus being delivered to be condemned to death and crucified.
So using collective counting, the day “these things” — Jesus being condemned to death and crucified — occurred is counted as day one.
Cleopas added:
Lk 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, TODAY is THE THIRD DAY since these things were done.
“Today” is the third day from “these things,” the condemnation and crucifixion.
Lk 24:1 Now upon the first day of the week,
Which is Sunday.
According to the Hebrew idiom Friday has to be day one of the count.
Lk 24:20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
Lk 24:23 And when they [the women] found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
Using verses 20 and 23 as bookends Jesus being “three days and three nights” has to occur between the bookends.
This is only possible if “three days and three nights” is idiomatic, not literal.
So the account in Luke as read, indirectly, confirms that “three days and three nights” is an idiom, not to be taken literally.
Or calendar days, darkness, night.......minutes or hours.
Occam's razor (the law of parsimony) is out. No accepting that 3 days and 3 nights (i.e. the solution with the fewest assumptions) as the truth because it disproves your theory,
reading Luke 23 and Mark 16 a Friday crucifixion likely suggests that they bought/ prepared spices before weekly sabbath (i.e. Friday evening); and subsequently bought more spices after sabbath i.e. on the Saturday evening.
(The 72 hours demands the entire Friday for this purpose to buy spices).
It does appear 33 AD is the only year in that period where the annual festival Sabbath and the weekly Sabbath coincided.
This is why many traditional scholars favor 33 AD
• Because John 19:31 says “that Sabbath was a high day”/''and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. ''
• A Saturday Nisan 15 is the most literal, straightforward reading of a High Sabbath
A Friday crucifixion does align with the fact that a Sabbath was to follow so it was easy (for Easter proponents) to call the regular Sabbath a high day when it really wasn't.
A “high day” occurs when:
• Nisan 15 (first day of Unleavened Bread — an annual Sabbath)
• falls on the weekly Sabbath
This produces a double‑Sabbath.
This is why John explains why the Jews were so urgent about removing the bodies — the next day was extra holy, not just a normal Sabbath.
We know not much but respectfully one ought recognise how some commenters consider a doublesabbath possibility
142
I marvel how people continue confusing the "law" with the "covenants". They are not one and the same thing.
I know exactly what Paul was doing, and trying to place the Corinthians under the Mosaic covenant was NOT it. As a minister of the new covenant, one who served and delighted in God's law, he was God's chosen vessel in bringing to the Corinthians instruction in righteousness and holy conduct, opening their eyes to the true meaning, spiritual significance, and exhaustive principle of God's one and only law. Different covenant--same law!
Right, 8:18. Three days and three nights is too simple for some simpletons. Christ in Mt 12:40 quotes directly from Jonah 1:17 but it's not good enough for them. Instead they're deceived by the hidden intrigue behind the "third day" phrase translations. Let's see, "3 days and 3 nights" isn't clear enough but the Jewish idiom for "third day" is more clearer with respect to time?
Somebody above wrote that a high day Sabbath will ALWAYS coincide with a regular sabbath, thus supporting the Fri-Sun theory. Not so. Festivals are called sabbaths too (in Lev 23), and they don't always coincide with regular sabbaths as we all know. Therefore, why do you argue against the possibility that He wasn't crucified before a regular Sabbath, if the two can merge or be separate in any given year? Also, if you want to make 1UB to fall on a regular Sabbath (to fit the Easter proponents), then you must make LUB to fall on a Friday prep day. This won't do if you are a priest but since so many COGs treat the Sabbath carelessly today it wouldn't matter to them.
How about the Didascalia for extra proof? There is some good correction in there and a call for a higher standard of conduct. But it was also doctored in certain places by the apostates, as in the explanation for the 3 days and 3 nights interval. The rascally and deceitful revisionist goes so far as to compile the darkness at the crucifixion 12-3 pm (one night), the last 2-3 hours of Fri (one day), Fri night (one night), Sat day (one day), Sat night (one night) and Sun morn (one day) into a sum of 3 days and 3 nights. I shook my head. Here is someone taking a wild swing at the theory, hoping to reconcile Jonah 1:17 with Mt 12:40 & Mk 8:31. Meanwhile our COG critics today do worse by shooting down the literal and calling it figurative. Not only that, the Didascalia declares that the crucifixion took place on the 4th day of the week, Wednesday, just as HWA taught. In this instance, I think the apostates forgot to edit it out of the script after inserting their wild theory about the 3 days and 3 nights interval as the two don't match.
Mk 16:1 has to explained against Lk 23:56. Did they buy the ointments before or after the Sabbath? If we believe the truth that 1UB did not fall on the regular Sabbath that week (which many disagree with), then Mk 16 tells us that the high day festival Sab had passed BEFORE the women went to buy the ointments on a Friday, thus agreeing with Lk 23 that they had bought them and then rested on the REGULAR Sabbath.
3:34 writes:
“Festivals are called sabbaths too (in Lev 23)”.
Technically they are not so called.
Lev 23:39 But in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, in your gathering the produce of the land, ye shall keep a festival of Jehovah seven days: in the first day a Shabbathon, and in the eighth day a Shabbathon.
Unfortunately the translators have translators two different Hebrews words as Shabbath.
Non-atonement holy days are not Sabbaths but Shabbatons.
The “on” suffix on the latter is a diminutive. A shabbaton is a minor sabbath.
A Shabbaton is less holy than a Shabbath.
As they are less holy one may prepare food on a Shabbaton.
One prepares their food for the Shabbath before the Shabbath starts.
Referring to a Shabbton [7677] as a Shabbath [7676] is like referring to a booklet as a book.
HWA use to say let the Bible interpret the Bible
Mt 28:1 And after the sabbaths, in the shining forth to one of the sabbaths, (SLT).
so when it comes to “sabbaths” used in Mt 28:1, in the NT, and Greek OT it never means two Sabbaths or a Shabbat and Shabbathon together.
As an aside 3:34, do you take these Scriptures literally?
Mt 5:29 If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away.
Mt 5:30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away.
Lk 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Would God command 3 feasts a year, and then command 4 more?
The 3 feasts are defined in Ex 23:14-16. The Passover Day feast of Ex 12:14 is not mentioned in Ex 23. Ex 23 lists (c)hags/feasts but Lev 23 lists moedims/moeds/fixed times.
To observe the 3 feasts in Ex 23, the Passover Day feast must be the first day of 7 days of UB, otherwise there are more than 3 feasts. The fixed times of Lev 23 are the 3 feasts, the weekly sabbath, and the 3 annual sabbaths of the 7th month.
2:27, technically festivals can be called sabbaths, as John does in Jn 19:31 when he calls the high day a Sabbath, and not just because it fell on a Sabbath, since we have shown that 1UB fell on a Thursday that year, the new moon appearing on a Wed night most likely. Someone above confirmed that Nisan 1 that year was Thurs April 12. Check with NASA. (Ironically the Easter proponents need help from the Heb postponements to back up a Nisan 15 1UB Sabbath)
Notice that John calls 1UB a sabbath even though in Lev 23 they are not called sabbaths. We are fussing over words here re the correct translation of Shabbaton. I perceive that one is a noun, Shabbat, and the other is a verb, Shabbaton, but this is just splitting hairs. I never was convinced of the argument that a festival was less holy than a reg Sabbath, thus allowing for food prep. If so, you tempt members to make the feasts just a food frenzy. In the past we pushed it to the edge so far that one pastor asked a member to pick up a bottle of wine on a feast day and justified it. When the wine runs out, you ask the Lord for it as Mary did at the wedding.
Re Mt 28:1 (and its counterpart verses in the other gospels), this is another controversial verse that is not well translated in the KJ, although your translation is reasonably good. Sabbath is plural here so it is referring to 1UB Sabbath on Thurs and the reg Sabbath on Sat. "At the close of the Sabbaths, as it grew light into the first (mia) of the Sabbaths (translated "week" in the KJ) came Mary...", is my translation. It is odd that they translated "Sabbaton" (pl) into "week" when "Sabbaths" is apparrently the original because THEY INADVERTENTLY OR ADVERTENTLY CALL SUNDAY A SABBATH. I know this is confusing but as I said before the translators are trying to fix the narrative to fit a Sunday resurrection. I know that some believe that this is a ref to the Pentecost count but it is oddly worded. It is my belief (and very few would agree with me) that the translators were scrambling to avoid mentioning that two sabbaths occurred that week in order to suit the Easter narrative, so they altered the verse to their own liking and made it more confusing.
Re Mt 5:29,30 & Lk 14:26, sure, I take them literally. Some can take being a eunuch but others can't. Some can take their sins seriously but others can't. I see this even with ministers. If the Father asked you to be tortured and scourged for mankind's salvation, would YOU do it? As I said, some can take it, others can't. Some can take being single, others are ready to fornicate with the world. The point of Mt 5 is to lead you to confess your sins or else lose everything.
As for Lk 14:26, that's another one where many of us are failing. Take me as an example of one desperate to return to the church, and what do I find? I find at the door one member talking about his kids. And I find another member talking about his wife. Meanwhile, I have no home, no fellowship and I wander on the hills and mountains like a wild man hungry and thirsty. If you really loved your discipleship more, what would you do vis-a-vis Luke 14:26? If they get in the way of your discipleship, yes, there will be some hate. God doesn't play favourites. Look at Zech 13:3. (You only rent your family for a short time on earth) To be frank, we all know that we are to love (see 1Jn), not hate, so we know the Lord is speaking here in figurative terms to express the seriousness of our discipleship. If you are a true disciple you will interpret it correctly in the spirit and not be troubled by the letter, for the law we keep is spiritual. Otherwise, taking offence at this may expose a degree of hate in you that you didn't know was there.
2:43 writes:
2:27, technically festivals can be called sabbaths, as John does in Jn 19:31 when he calls the high day a Sabbath, and not just because it fell on a Sabbath, since we have shown that 1UB fell on a Thursday that year, the new moon appearing on a Wed night most likely. Someone above confirmed that Nisan 1 that year was Thurs April 12.
I was the one who provided the date for the Nisan 1 in AD 31.
For me my present position is that the Crucifixion took place on Friday, April 7, AD 30; with the first evening of the visible crescent being March 24. The modern Hebrew calendar did not exist in the time of Christ - no postponements here.
I do not except your argument that festivals are called sabbaths based on John 19:31. The shabbaton, according to John’s calendar fell on the Shabbath in AD 30.
2:43 writes:
“I perceive that one is a noun, Shabbat, and the other is a verb, Shabbaton, but this is just splitting hairs.”
Shabbaton can be a noun, adjective or verb depending on context. In Lev 23:39 it is a noun.
This simpleton (me) likes the detail.
2:43 writes:
“It is odd that they translated "Sabbaton" (pl) into "week" when "Sabbaths" is apparrently the original because THEY INADVERTENTLY OR ADVERTENTLY CALL SUNDAY A SABBATH.”
It is not odd.
Mt 12:1 In that time Jesus went in the SABBATHS [sabbasin - dat PLURAL neut] through the standing corn and his disciples were hungry, and began to pluck the ears, end eat. (SLT).
Mt 12:2 And the Pharisees, seeing, said to him, Behold, thy disciples do what is not lawful to do in the SABBATH [sabbatĹŤ - dat SINGULAR neut]. (SLT).
Lk 18:12 I fast twice in the SABBATH [gen SINGULAR neut], I give tithes of all that I possess.
1Co 16:2 Upon the first day of the SABBATH [gen SINGULAR neut]
1Co 16:2 Upon the first [day] of the week (AV).
Ex 20:8: Remember the day of the Sabbath [com SINGULAR] to consecrate it.
Exo 20:8 Remember the SABBATH [sabbaton - gen PLURAL neut] day to keep it holy. (LXX).
The Hebrews used both the singular and the plural sabbath/shabbaths for the seventh day of the week; and the singular and plural sabbath/sabbaths to refer to the week.
The Pentateuch of the LXX appears to have been translated around 250 BC and the plural sabbaton, as in Ex 20:8, was used where the MT had the singular sabbath. So around three hundred years later the NT authors were using the plural sabbath for the singular.
Pa 23:1a A Psalm for David on the first day of the week [tes mias SABBATON - gen PLURAL neut]. (Brenton, LXX).
Mk 16:2 And very early in the morning of one of the sabbaths [tes mias SABBATON - gen PLURAL neut],
The Greek for Mk 16:2 is from the Received Text; the Critical Text has “te mia ton sabbaton”.
The RT text of Mk 16:2 is exactly the same as the Greek in Psalm 23:1a LXX. (Ps 23 of LXX equals Ps 24 MT).
Psa 93:1 A Psalm of David for the fourth [tetradi] day of the week [sabbaton - gen PLURAL neut]. (Brenton LXX). (Ps 94 MT).
And the NT authors were using the plural sabbath for “week” just as in the LXX.
Cp. also
Ac 17:2a And the custom with Paul, he entered to them, and on SABBATHS [sabbata - acc PLURAL neut] three reasoned with them from the Scriptures... (IHGEB).
Exo 16:25 And Moses said, Eat that to-day, for to-day is a SABBATH [sabbata - acc PLURAL neut] to the Lord: it shall not be found in the plain. (LXX).
Exo 16:26 Six days ye shall gather it, and on the seventh day is a SABBATH [sabbata - acc PLURAL neut], for there shall be none on that day. (LXX).
Part 2
2:43 writes:
“It is my belief (and very few would agree with me) that the translators were scrambling to avoid mentioning that two sabbaths occurred that week in order to suit the Easter narrative, so they altered the verse to their own liking and made it more confusing.”
Mt 28:1 And after the sabbaths [sabbaton - gen PLURAL neut], in the shining forth to one of the sabbaths [sabbaton - gen PLURAL neut], (SLT).
Acts 13:14 and having come into the synagogue on THE DAY [HEMERA] OF THE SABBATHS [sabbaton - gen PLURAL neut], they sat down. (SLT).
Acts 16:13 And the DAY [HEMERA] OF THE SABBATHS [sabbaton - gen PLURAL neut] we came out of the city by the river, (SLT).
Col 2:16 Therefore let not any judge you in food, or in drink, or in turn of festival, or of the new moon, or of sabbaths [sabbaton - gen PLURAL neut]: (SLT).
When I want to quote a literal translation, the SLT is the first I go to:
“Julia E. Smith's Bible Translation (1876) is a strictly literal, "word-for-word" translation of the Old and New Testaments, famously produced by a woman and her sisters in the 19th century. It aims for extreme consistency, often using the same English word for every occurrence of a specific Hebrew or Greek word, regardless of context” (AI).
When it says “THE DAY [HEMERA] OF THE SABBATHS” do you interpret is a shabbaton occurring on a Shabbath, or a Sabbath occurring on a Sabbath?
It is definitely not my belief that the translators were scrambling and altered the text to their own liking; the translators were being true to the text:
Mt 28:1 And after the sabbaths (SLT).
Mt 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, (AV).
Mt 28:1 After the end of the week: (see Adam Clarke’s Commentary (1760/2-1832).
“It makes little difference whether one conceives of the Greek plural for sabbath as referring to the day or to an entire week (the time from one day of rest to another). If the first is meant, then the idea is that this was the first day counting from the sabbath-day; hence, the first day after the sabbath-day. If the second is meant, the result is still the same; the day indicated is then not the last of the week but the first. In either case Sunday is meant” (William Hendriksen, Matthew, NTC, p.987).
Hag in Exodus and Leviticus
Ex 34:18 The feast [hag] of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread,
Ex 34:22 And thou shalt observe the feast [hag] of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast [hag] of ingathering at the year's end.
Holy days called Feasts?
Ex 12:14a And this day [i.e., fifteenth] day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast [hag] to the LORD throughout your generations;
Lev 23:6 AND ON THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF THE SAME MONTH IS THE FEAST [HAG] of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.
Ex 13:6 Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, and in THE SEVENTH DAY SHALL BE A FEAST [HAG] to the LORD.
The fifteenth and twenty-first of Nisan are feasts = holy days?
“In v. 6, the term “feast to Jehovah” points to the keeping of the seventh day by a holy convocation and the suspension of work (ch. 12:16). It is only of the seventh day that this is expressly stated, because it was understood as a matter of course, that the first was a feast of Jehovah” (C. F. Keil, Pentateuch, KD, Vol. 1, p. 341).
But Lev 23:6 may also imply that the Feast begins on the fifteenth.
Proposed but not kept Feast
Ex 10:9bβ for we must hold a feast [hag] to the LORD.
Illegitimate Feast
Ex 32:5b and Aaron made proclamation, and said, Tomorrow is a feast [hag] to the LORD.
(1Ki 12:32aα1 And Jeroboam ordained a feast [hag] in the eighth month, on the fifteenth day of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah).
Lev 23:6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.
Ex 12:18 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even.
In Lev 23:6 the fifteenth day is a sunset to sunset day - a holy day; while in Exodus 12:18 it is a sunrise to sunrise day - a secular day.
A holy day starts half a day before a secular day begins.
“So it appears that sacred units of time commence before the equivalent units of secular time that they overlap” (Roy Gane, Leviticus, Numbers, NIVAC, p.435).
Compare:
Lev 23:27aα Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement:...
Lev 23:32 It shall be unto you a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls: in the ninth day of the month at even, from even unto even, shall ye celebrate your sabbath.
Tenth day = holy day; ninth day = secular day.
"Some have felt this at variance with the Jewish practice of regarding sunset as the beginning of the day. [Rabbi Umberto] Cassuto, after dealing with the biblical data and the Jewish custom, concluded that there was "only one system of computing time: the day is considered to begin in the morning; but in regard to the festivals and appointed times, the Torah ordains that they shall be observed also on the night of the PRECEDING DAY" (U. Cassuto, Genesis, I, p.29 [his emphasis [in italics]])..." (Ronald B. Allen, "‘ rab," TWOT, Vol.2, p.694).
I love this comment. Thank you 3:34.
Very very revealing post 8:21. Is that why you target the oldies now? Interesting.
I have always taken it as a blessing from God that A.C. did not exist for my generation. I have known contemporaries who mourned it's loss. I never did. I believe A.C was more corrupt than it ever let on.
I have always found A.C grads to have somehow acquired the distinct spirit of lying.
3:49, Too much learning doth make thee mad. (Acts 26:24) After all that, you still arrive at the wrong conclusions.
The translators were true to the text, you say? Not entirely, when they failed to translate Pascha into Passover. It doesn't matter what your sources say when they dismiss this.
Strive not over words to no profit (2 Tim 2:14) and don't harp over searches and disputes of words. (1 Tim 6:4) You may like the details but the details are deceiving you.
As a believer who is soon to become a priest in the Kingdom, you better make sure that your teaching is clear and understandable before the Lord, otherwise you edify no one. You are similar to Scout. You speak in a tongue that doesn't benefit anyone. You obfuscate the facts by making them less clear with your overanalysis and occasional subjective reasoning. It is words of faith that we ought to be delivering to the church (1 Tim 4:6), not bewitching them over the differences between the LXX and MT, or the CT and TR, or the Hebrew and the Greek.
2:50 writes:
“As a believer who is soon to become a priest in the Kingdom”
Eze 44:23 And they [the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok] shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean.
Eze 44:24 And in controversy they shall stand in judgment; and they shall judge it according to my judgments: and they shall keep my laws and my statutes in all mine assemblies; and they shall hallow my sabbaths.
In the Messianic Age the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok, will be teachers of the people — “my people”.
Rev 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
Rev 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
Rev 7:15 Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.
I don't know whether the saints as priests in heaven will have a teaching function - those in heaven now already know more than those on the earth.
2Ti 4:18 The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to HIS HEAVENLY KINGDOM. To him be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Eph 2:6 And God raised us up [a prolepsis] with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus,
At least one knows from Eph 2:6 that the saints will have a ruling function in heaven as implied by being “seated” with Christ in his heavenly kingdom.
2:50 wrote earlier:
“I never was convinced of the argument that a festival was less holy than a reg Sabbath, thus allowing for food prep”.
I will go along with Rabbi Sarna in this regard:
Ex 12:16 And in the first day there shall be a proclamation of holiness, and in the seventh day there shall be a proclamation of holiness to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you.
“The first and last days of the festival possess special sanctity but not quite to the same degree as the Sabbath and Day of Atonement. The preparation of food on those particular days is exempted from the prohibition on performing labor; other leniencies retain as well [46]” ([Rabbi] Nahum M. Sarna, Exodus, The JPS Torah Commentary, p.59).
12:30, your belief in a 30 AD crucifixion doesn't square with all the evidence from the historians, namely, the 15th year of Tiberius, the first census of Quirinus (from 4 BC), the death of Herod about 4 BC, and the 3 hour eclipse in China in the 7th year of emperor Quang Wu. (25-57 AD)
If I took more time to find it all, there would be more, such as in the 70 weeks prophecy.
There appears to be no consensus on what year Jesus was crucified; with a Friday crucifixion it is either AD 30 or AD 33.
MY PREFERENCE IS FOR THE FORMER, CONSIDERING ALL THE DIFFICULTIES.
armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2025/04/op-ed-seventy-weeks-prophecy.html
I take 458-457 BC, Tishri to Tishri, as the first year of the count of the 483 years (inclusive reckoning); which was completed in AD 25-26.
AD 26-27 is therefore the first year of the seventieth week, comprised of seven years, with Christ dying in the middle of the prophetic week in AD 30, that is, three and a half years later.
Da 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, AND TO ANOINT THE HOLY OF HOLIES.
Jesus has the second half of his prophetic week to complete, at the end of which the Messianic Temple will be anointed paving the way for Jesus to have a dwelling-presence in the Millennial Temple as he did in Solomon’s Temple and Moses’ Tabernacle.
There is also no consensus on the date of the 15th year of Tiberius. The question is what did the historian Luke consider to be the 15th year?
“If Luke means the fifteenth year since the co-regency, then the year John appeared would be A.D. 26/27, when Jesus was about thirty years old (Luke 3:23)... The chief difficulty with this date, however, is that normally the reigns of rulers are not dated back to coregencies but to the year when the regent becomes sole ruler...” (Craig A. Evans, Luke, NIBC, p.50).
Lk 3:2a during the high priesthood [archiereus] of Annas and Caiaphas
Ac 4:6 And Annas the high priest [archiereus], and Caiaphas,
2Ki 25:18 And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the door:
“Luke adds a dating of peculiar importance to Jews, namely reference to the high-priesthood. Annas was high priest AD 6-15, when the Roman governor Gratus deposed him. Five of his sons became high priest in due course, and Caiaphas, who held the office AD 18-36, was his son-in-law. Luke uses the singular, which shows that he knew Caiaphas was actually in office, but that Annas still exercised great influence, perhaps even was regarded by many Jews as the true high priest (cf. Acts 4:6;...). It may be worth pointing out that when Jesus was arrested he was first brought to Annas (Jn. 18:13)” (Leon Morris, Luke, TNTC, pp.111-12).
“Annas, the senior ex high priest, was there, and so was his son-in-law Caiaphas, the reigning high priest... He is called “the high priest” here in the sense of ex-high priest (or, as we might say, high priest emeritus)” (F. F. Bruce, Acts, NICNT, p.91).
“But Greek archiereus is used not only of the high priest strictly so called, but also of the chief priests in general, i.e. members of the wealthy families from which the high priests at this time were regularly selected” (F. F. Bruce, Acts, NBC, 3rd edition, p.977).
Part 2
“ “WE GET NOWHERE BY CONSIDERING HOW TIBERIUS HIMSELF COUNTED THE YEARS OF HIS REIGN OR HOW THE YEARS WERE GENERALLY COUNTED. WHAT MATTERS IS HOW LUKE COUNTED THEM.” This Greijdanus ... believes that Luke was thinking of actual, not merely formal, years of reigns, as his reference to Annas-Caiphas indicates” (William Hendriksen, Luke, NTC, p.198).
“In Luke 3:1, 2 the analogy with the Annas-Caiaphas reference confirms the conclusion that Luke is thinking of the actual reign of Tiberius, which began with the latter’s coregency, and that he is not thinking of Tiberius’ sole rulership began at the time of the death of Tiberius” (S. Greijdanus, Konnentaar, Vol. I, p.140)” (William Hendriksen, Luke, NTC, p.198).
So for me the first regnal year of Tiberius’ joint rule of the Provinces — Jewish Calendar Years, Non-Accession-Year, is Oct A.D. 12-Mar/April A.D. 13; with the fifteen year being March/April A.D. 26-March/April, A.D. 27.
Until someone can provide a better scheme of the seventy weeks as it corelates to the Crucifixion this is my preferred interpretation.
Da 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
The Messiah in 9:26 is both the Christ and the Antichrist, both killed during their prophetic weeks.
The “people of the prince,” that is, the people of the Antichrist, will “destroy the city and the sanctuary”.
Da 11:45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.
Paving the way for Jerusalem to be the city of the Antichrist.
The Antichrist is the person who opposes Christ as Christ; and Babylon the Great will oppose Jerusalem as Jerusalem.
I may be wrong; but time will tell.
12:22, I think I know who you are. Are you John?
Messiah in Dan 9:26 cannot be both Christ and Antichrist. Christ is Messiah but Antichrist is the prince.
What do you think? Are we on the brink of witnessing it once the US-Iranian war has finished?
Re your dates for Tiberius, you count from Spring to Spring (26-27 AD). Why don't you count from Fall to Fall? Evidence (from Suetonius) shows that Tiberius returned from Germania Oct AD 12, after which the consuls passed a law that would allow him to co-rule with Augustus. This happened quickly. So the 1st year of Tiberius would be from Fall to Fall, 26-27AD, thus making possible the Lord's appearing in AD 27 and the crucifixion in AD 31. Now, did John begin his preaching from 26 AD Fall?
No comments on the Chinese phenomenon? the date of Herod's death? Testimonies from the Didascalia, Ephiphanius or Victorinus of Pettau that support a Wednesday crucifixion?
The apostle Peter states it clearly in the Didascalia but many refuse to believe it because they prefer the popular, traditional narrative.
Yes I am John/MPM not John/time will tell.
While my time-line may come across as too neat, I need a more convincing argument to change. From what I have read there is no consensus on the year Herod died and the eclipse.
In regard to extra-biblical data while it can be helpful, but based on my PRESENT interpretation of the Biblical accounts my understanding disagrees with the Didascalia etc.
In regard to counting it depends on how the person who wrote counted the time.
"Mishnah Rosh HaShanah, chapter 1
"(1) There are four New Years. On the first of Nissan is the [cut off date for the] New Year regarding [the count of the reigns of the Jewish] kings [which was used to date legal documents. If a king began his reign in Adar even if was only for one day that is considered his first year, and from the first of Nissan is considered his second year, thus one would write: "On the First of Nissan, in the second year of the reign of King so and so,"] and [the Festival which is in Nissan, namely Pesah is also the beginning of the count for] the [three] Festivals..." (emishnah.com/moed2/Rosh_HaShanah/1.pdf).
The Mishnah, informed what I wrote below.
So for me the first regnal year of Tiberius' joint rule of the Provinces — Jewish Calendar Years, Non-Accession-Year, is Oct A.D. 12-Mar/April A.D. 13; with the fifteen year being March/April A.D. 26-March/April, A.D. 27.
Da 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, AND TO ANOINT THE HOLY OF HOLIES.
There is more to the seventy weeks prophecy in Daniel as suggested by especially last clause.
Da 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the MESSIAH THE PRINCE [NÄ€GĂŽD] shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
Da 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of THE PRINCE [NÄ€GĂŽD] that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
From my interpretation of the Seventy weeks both Christ and the Antichrist have a prophetic week, with both being killed half way through their weeks.
That Christ was killed at Passover then his ministry would have to start around Tishri AD 26 so I use a fall to fall year for the Seventy Weeks.
You write:
Messiah in Dan 9:26 cannot be both Christ and Antichrist.
From my understanding of type-antitype telescopic prophecy the Messiah can be both.
Da 7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
When the Antichrist comes up among the ten kings and makes the covenant in 9:27 then there is three and half years to the beginning of the Tribulation and seven to the return of Christ.
As mentioned above my time-line and interpretation of events maybe too neat but I am yet to be convinced of a better scheme.
It looks like we will have to agree to disagree on the details
MPM 1222 and 642 writes,
The Anti-christ is the person who opposes Christ as Christ, and Babylon will oppose Jerusalem as Jerusalem.
Paving the way for Jerusalem to be the city of the Anti-christ.
Both Christ and the Anti-christ have a prophetic week, with both being killed halfway through their week.
When the Anti-christ comes up and makes the covenant of Dan.9:27, then there is 3 1/2 years to the beginning of the Tribulation and 7 years to the return of Christ.
These are powerful scriptural observations that parallel my prophetic understanding and end time scenario. Where we may differ is, I see great significance in the terminology used to describe the 2 periods of that final 7 years (1260 days / 42 months) as descriptive designations for the seperation of the dominant players (the 2 Witnesses's / the Beast) and events (the 7 seals) that control the 7 year narrative. Yes, time will tell.
John,
Are you from the COGs or some other group?
So Oct, Nov or Dec probably was the start of Tiberius co-reign, which puts the 15th year between fall-winter of '26 to fall-winter of '27. Note that in this period we have BOTH the beginning of John's ministry and Christ's baptism. So what can we say? That John preached for 6 months or more before the Lord came to be baptized late summer/early fall '27 (at age 30)? (even though Catholics celebrate His baptism in January)
Our understanding of Dan 9 does differ but don't confuse Christ with Antichrist in a prophecy. We have so many differing opinions on prophecy in the church that I can see another split happening when that time comes. Not even the pastors know what they are talking about.
BTW, who is that little horn in Dan 7:8?
How do you see the current wars playing out as they relate to prophecy?
More proof from the ancient historians who are being muzzled by the younger crowd:
Gildas wrote that the gospel came to Britain from Joseph of Arimathaea in the last year of Tiberius (36-37 AD, Spring to Spring), 5 years after the crucifixion. Thus, more support for a 31 AD crucifixion.
3:24 writes:
“Note that in this period we have BOTH the beginning of John's ministry and Christ's baptism”.
No we don’t - sorry if this sounds a bit harsh, it is not meant to be.
From the Misnah above:
“If a king began his reign in Adar even if was only for one day that is considered his first year, and from the first of Nissan is considered his second year, thus one would write: "On the First of Nissan, in the second year of the reign of King so and so,"...:
I have the fifteen year beginning at Nisan AD 26; and the beginning of Christ’s ministry around Tishri AD 26; which gives a crucifixion in AD 30.
I am not with a COG or some other group.
I was suspended from the WCG in early 1993 and over the next 16 years attended off and on with the splinters and a fellowship.
During this time I was accepting different understandings to the WCG.
“The mistake of the Chiliasts was, they restricted the kingdom to the terrestrial part. Besides this earthly glory, there shall be the heavenly glory of the saints reigning above" (A. R. Fausset, 1 Corinthians, JFB, Vol.3, p.298).
Andrew Fausset wrote this well before HWA was born.
In 1998 my belief was that the reward of the saints was in heaven, helped by Andrew Fausset.
1998 was also the year that I accepted differences interpretations of prophecy and put together some information that I entitled “Who and What is the Beast of Revelation?”.
So having different understandings meant my time in the COG sphere was numbered.
When it comes to telescopic prophecy this helps me in attempting to understand the future:
To see what Christ does see, see what the Antichrist does.
To see what the Antichrist does see what Christ does:
"In John's description of the beast, there are numerous parallels with Jesus that should alert the reader to the fact that John is seeking to establish...a theological characterization...: Both wielded swords; both had followers on whose foreheads were inscribed their names (13:16-14:1); both had horns (5:6; 13:1); both were slain, the same Greek word being used to describe their deaths (sphagizo, vv.3,8); both had arisen to new life and authority; and both were given (by different authorities) power over every nation, tribe, people, and tongue as well as over kings of the earth (1:5; 7:9; with 13:7; 17:12). The beast described here is the great theological counterpart to all that Christ represents..." (Alan F. Johnson, Revelation, EBC, Vol.12, p.527).
Part 2
3:24 writes:
BTW, who is that little horn in Dan 7:8?
Da 7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
The Antichrist - who comes up after there are ten kings on the scene.
You write:
How do you see the current wars playing out as they relate to prophecy?
I only see the current war as being part of the decline of the USA.
I see a time of economic trouble ahead with depression and severe recession leading to the breakup and reorganizing of nations, which includes the 10 kings arising out of the turmoil.
"... can we be sure that history has written finis to what was perhaps the grandest design ever conceived by man: the Holy Roman Empire?" (George Bailey, Germans: Biography of an Obsession, (1972), p.360).
Europe is such a bad way economically -Great Depression ahead, and demographically, with the third world invasion, that the only way out is reinventing itself through religious revival - compare the revival under Napoleon as a type; this will likely mean what the Jews were to the 1930s-40s the Muslims will be to the near future; but it will be more violent - convert to Christianity or leave, voluntarily or forcefully.
Here are two short videos on (1) the collapse of China and the havoc that it will create in the world and (2) the decline of America, which in the penultimate stage of its rise and fall.
Every Empire Dies the Same Way:
youtube.com/watch?v=kZDyEa95u-s
China:
youtube.com/watch?v=M0CqC2FKxoQ
Have a nice day :)
You're right about Europe, John, the dominance of its society by its immigrants, Sharia courts within its jurisdictions, rising prices, weak political leaders, the refusal to stand together with the US under NATO in the Iran war. Trump may pull out of NATO at some point and leave them to fend for themselves. The Antichrist may be forced to stand up against it all, just as Trump did in order to stabilize the country.
Once the US leaves the Gulf, someone (the UN as in Gaza?) will have to fill the void, unless Trump thoroughly dismantles the rogue Iranian government, thus leaving no troublemakers to police.
Good observation about conditions in France around the time of the French revolution, re religion being used as a tool to create a social order, just as the coming beast will attempt to do so. Also relevant is that Louis XVl was a weak king, just as we see today among leaders in Europe and in the US Democratic party with their left-wing policies (who hate Trump 's show of strength even though strength is needed).
Re strength, one of my favourite verses is, "Being strengthened with all power (dunamis) according to His glorious strength (kratos)..." (Col 1:11) TODAY NOT JUST THE DEMOCRATS BUT EVEN OUR OWN ELDERS ARE INTIMIDATED BY A SHOW OF TOO MUCH STRENGTH FROM THEIR MEMBERS!
Yes, I see a social chaos in Europe happening just as a I see a possible civil war in America (because the Democratic party does not want to back away from its wickedness). The west has tried to tolerate radical Islamic militancy but Christianity cannot co-exist with Islam. It's tolerance is reaching a breaking point. Social chaos might inspire the future marking by the beast though a worldwide catastrophe may do the same, just to keep track of everybody and to verify identity and citizenship.
I viewed those videos. I agree with 95% of the first one's message but not with his statement that the US is fighting a war it cannot win. It tells you something when an islamic republic (Iran) accuses a Christian nation (US) of being the "great Satan" and then gets its defences pummelled, obliterated and humiliated as if "Allah" is too weak to defend them. We are coming close to a short period of peace but before then a disreputable government in the region had to be punished.
The second video bewails the effects of the oil blockade on China but the fact is that the President is trying to end the war as quickly as possible. Nothing is safe for anyone if Iran is allowed to shoot at everybody, including its own citizens (20-30thousand?). Other nations only got involved when they saw Iran losing.
You do realize that America will get spanked first before the rest of the world is punished later, do you?
So you believe in a 7-year trib? Then when is the flight to safety?
Hi 1:41
With any presentation there will be things one will not agree with; for me it is the ‘trend’ that is important, as they say in stockmarket investing, “the trend is your friend”.
Lk 1:36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month.
Just want to back up on the fifteenth year of Tiberius. It works well if the regnal year begins in Nisan and this being around the beginning of John the Baptist ministry at age 30. Over the spring and summer of AD 26 he would have a baptizing ministry where he would gain followers. Then in around autumn Jesus, being about thirty, begins the first half of his prophetic week.
Though one can be baptized in the Jordan all year round, and that is can be extremely hot in summer, the ideal time, according to one video presentation, for Christian tourists to come and be baptized in Jordan is from May to mid-October.
You ask:
1:41 You do realize that America will get spanked first before the rest of the world is punished later, do you?
No I don’t. But I will presume that you will soon inform me; but please don’t quote Daniel 11:39 as Bob Thiel does.
For the record, Dan 11:36-39 deals with the conduct and policy of the Antichrist. Just because it occurs in the text chronologically before v. 40, does not mean that verse 39 occurs before verse 40 in fulfilment; when dealing with Hebrew literature this can be a dangerous assumption.
Compare: “The hysteron proteron ... is a rhetorical device. It occurs when the first key word of the idea refers to something that happens temporally later than the second key word. THE GOAL IS TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE MORE IMPORTANT IDEA BY PLACING IT FIRST...” (Wikipedia).
“...the arrangement of events in the reverse of their logical order” (David E. Aune, Revelation 17-22, WBC, p.1102).
No I don’t believe in a 7-year tribulation; for me it is the three and a half years or the second half of the Antichrist’s prophetic week.
The flight to safety will likely be when the Antichrist goes to Egypt (Dan 11:42):
“While the ‘little horn' is in Egypt there may be an uprising of the Jews at a result of the profaning of the temple by this "king of the North". This would parallel Jason's failed attempt to ouster Menelaus when there was the report that Antiochus had died in Egypt... Then the 'little horn' will send one of his generals to punish Jerusalem and the Jews (Daniel 9:26b). This would then appear to be the beginning of the "time, times, and half a time" (1260 days) of Daniel 12:7” (“Daniel and the Time of the End”, p.78).
As Ahab and Jezebel are types of the Beast and false prophet, the 100 prophets hidden in the two caves by Obadiah provides a type for the endtime place of safety.
As Elijah confronted the Baal worship promoted by Jezebel, typology suggests that the two witnesses confront the Antichrist worship promoted by the False Prophet for most of the second half of the Antichrist’s week — up to the beginning of the third woe? I have put a question mark after woe as I haven’t looked at this for awhile. I hope to do a refresher on Revelation after I have finished a commentary on Ezekiel 40-48. But being pedantic this may be some time in the future.
I have posted the first part again as I am unsure that I copied and pasted all of it:
Hi 1:41
With any presentation there will be things one will not agree with; for me it is the ‘trend’ that is important, as they say in stockmarket investing, “the trend is your friend”.
Lk 1:36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month.
Just want to back up on the fifteenth year of Tiberius. It works well if the regnal year begins in Nisan and this being around the beginning of John the Baptist ministry at age 30. Over the spring and summer of AD 26 he would have a baptizing ministry where he would gain followers. Then in around autumn Jesus, being about thirty, begins the first half of his prophetic week.
Though one can be baptized in the Jordan all year round, and that is can be extremely hot in summer, the ideal time, according to one video presentation, for Christian tourists to come and be baptized in Jordan is from May to mid-October.
You ask:
1:41 You do realize that America will get spanked first before the rest of the world is punished later, do you?
No I don’t. But I will presume that you will soon inform me; but please don’t quote Daniel 11:39 as Bob Thiel does.
For the record, Dan 11:36-39 deals with the conduct and policy of the Antichrist. Just because it occurs in the text chronologically before v. 40, does not mean that verse 39 occurs before verse 40 in fulfilment; when dealing with Hebrew literature this can be a dangerous assumption.
Compare: “The hysteron proteron ... is a rhetorical device. It occurs when the first key word of the idea refers to something that happens temporally later than the second key word. THE GOAL IS TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE MORE IMPORTANT IDEA BY PLACING IT FIRST...” (Wikipedia).
“...the arrangement of events in the reverse of their logical order” (David E. Aune, Revelation 17-22, WBC, p.1102).
No I don’t believe in a 7-year tribulation; for me it is the three and a half years or the second half of the Antichrist’s prophetic week.
The flight to safety will likely be when the Antichrist goes to Egypt (Dan 11:42):
“While the ‘little horn' is in Egypt there may be an uprising of the Jews at a result of the profaning of the temple by this "king of the North". This would parallel Jason's failed attempt to ouster Menelaus when there was the report that Antiochus had died in Egypt... Then the 'little horn' will send one of his generals to punish Jerusalem and the Jews (Daniel 9:26b). This would then appear to be the beginning of the "time, times, and half a time" (1260 days) of Daniel 12:7” (“Daniel and the Time of the End”, p.78).
As Ahab and Jezebel are types of the Beast and false prophet, the 100 prophets hidden in the two caves by Obadiah provides a type for the endtime place of safety.
As Elijah confronted the Baal worship promoted by Jezebel, typology suggests that the two witnesses confront the Antichrist worship promoted by the False Prophet for most of the second half of the Antichrist’s week — up to the beginning of the third woe? I have put a question mark after woe as I haven’t looked at this for awhile. I hope to do a refresher on Revelation after I have finished a commentary on Ezekiel 40-48. But being pedantic this may be some time in the future.
Part 2
A comment on Daniel 11:39
Da 11:39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.
"Napoleon established a new nobility of princes, dukes, counts, barons and knights... He ensured that as many people as possible had a stake in the empire" (Desmond Seward, Napoleon and Hitler, p.106).
"Literally translated this reads, "strongholds of fortress" (mibtsere ma‘uzzim). The Antichrist will not hold back from attacking any stronghold, as he puts his reliance in his war machine" (Leon J. Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, p.307).
"The NIV goes too far with the translation: he will attack the mightiest fortresses with the help of a foreign god (11:39)... the Hebrew has no verb here meaning "attack." The MT has the more general verb, ‘asah, "to do." Of course, with "fortresses" as the object, it is possible to understand what he is "doing" to the fortresses as "attacking." However, if the MT is followed, the verb could be translated "to deal with" as in the NRSV: "He shall deal with the strongest fortresses." This communicates the ambiguity of the Hebrew. "Dealing with fortresses," may mean building them, strengthening them, or placing troops in them; it does not have to mean attacking them" (William B. Nelson, Daniel, UBCS, p.287 & 307).
"... fortified, i.e., strong fortresses, are not the fortified walls and houses, but the inhabitants of the fortified cities" (C. F. Keil, Daniel, KD, Vol.9, p.806).
"Mt 23:37a O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you,
This would be metonymy, the figure of speech, which refers to someone or something by an associate term — so in this example "strong fortresses" ‘represent' the people. Compare Jerusalem used for its people in Mt 23:37.
"This makes more sense and connects better with the next two parts of the verse, because all three clauses are about people" (William B. Nelson, Daniel, UBCS, p.287).
"With these he does according to his will with the help of his god, i.e., of war, namely in this, that ... the king will bestow honour, power, and possessions on those who acknowledge him and conduct themselves according to his will, and they accord with the character of Antichrist in a yet higher degree than with that of Antiochus" (C. F. Keil, Daniel, KD, Vol.9, p.806).
"Those who recognize him he will highly honor:... The thought ... is that among those whom he conquers, [and those who collaborate from the start], he will honor those who readily give obeisance. To rule over many: They will be given positions of leadership, presumably either as officers in his own government or as subrulers over conquered provinces. Allotting land as a reward: Literally, this states that "he will allot land in connection with a reward." The thought is that the amount of land over which any subruler would be given authority would be granted as a reward, and thus it would vary with the degree of obeisance rendered and the subruler's potential as an aid to the Antichrist" (Leon J. Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, p.307).
John, you quoted from Mishnah to support the Spring-to-Spring reckoning (an Egyptian influenced tradition?) but this article below asserts that Jews used Fall-to-Fall long before in 5th century BC. Tishri begins the civil year. Adam's name in Heb spelled backwards means "1st of Tishri". The Jewish calendrical calculations start with setting the Tishri festival dates first, marking off the quarter points, the solstices and equinoxes from there, as far as I understand.
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1953/06/research-the-seventh-year-of-artaxerxes-i
In this article, well-researched, the author proves that Artaxerxes ascended the throne in late December 465 BC so that his accession year would begin LATER in Fall 464 BC (unlike what you did by going back to Spring 12 AD to establish the beginning of Tiberius' reign even though he got his co-regency around Oct-Dec 12 AD). This makes the 7th year to begin 457 BC, from which we get to 27AD fall for the Lord's appearing. But John began the year before -- 26 AD, the 15th year, as we know. I know you prefer to start Tiberius' reign from spring to spring but even you qualify it with an "if". (Really, how can you date Tiberius reign from 12 AD Spring when he didn't get the title until 12 AD fall/winter?) On top of this, if John was beheaded in August, according to Catholicism, under your scenario you would give him only a 6-8 month ministry (starting from Jan 26AD to fit under Tiberius' 15th yr period, so as to avoid ending it in 27 AD. This). My findings would give him approx a full year of preaching.
Your findings have to fit the 70 weeks prophecy, as I said before (if you don't like a 4 BC birthdate), that is the first 483 years from the decree to the appearing. From 457 BC to 27 AD we count 483 years with one week remaining. This has been my understanding for 40 years. Under this scenario we can fit John's period into it, noting that he too was born the same year as the Lord, 4 BC, which you dispute even though it is fairly well-established. Even the reign for Archelaus (Mt 2:22) after Herod is noted as 4BC, so we see a lot happening in 4 BC fall, birth of Christ, the Magi visitation, the flight to Egypt, the slaughter of babies, the death of Herod to Archelaus taking over (a roughly 3 month period).
Again, I say, a 30 AD crucifixion places Christ's beginning ministry from 26 AD, which collides with John who preceded him, since AFTER John was imprisoned Jesus began. This doesn't synchronize with the 457 BC decree.
No, I will not quote Dan 11:39 as Thiel so often does in error when explaining America's place in Daniel's prophecy. I will quote Dan 12:1 instead as a starting point re the time of Jacob's trouble (tightness, tribulation). And Jacob is America and Britain as you know, unless you have fallen for the lies of the mainstream. As for 11:39, it has already been fulfilled and will be fulfilled again.
If you don't believe in a 7-year trib, what do you call the first 3.5 years? How do you know when it is here?
Your timing is off. The Antichrist will not provoke the Jews by profaning the temple and thus begin the trib. He will do it later at the end.
Re the witnesses prophesying until the 3rd woe, good surmising but Russia and China are not going to stop them until someone kills them just 3 1/2 days before the Lord's coming.
This is in response to Part 1. I will try to respond to Part 2 later.
1:57
“Adam's name in Heb spelled backwards means ‘1st of Tishri’.”
Idk who or what your source is for that, but it’s completely incorrect.
1:57
The modern Hebrew calendar did not exit in the time of Christ.
According to the modern Hebrew calendar Nisan 14, was Monday, March 26, AD 31 (Julian dating).
You may like to read: “Why the Crucifixion of Christ Could Not Have Occurred in 31 AD” by Carl D. Franklin, easily found on the internet.
Using the modern Hebrew calendar the Christian Biblical Church of God has AD 30 as the year of Crucifixion - which the modern Hebrew calendar has Nisan 14 as a Wednesday.
I agree with AD 30 but with a Friday crucifixion but not based on a calculated calendar; but of observation, with the first evening of the visible crescent on Friday March 24.
1:57 writes:
Really, how can you date Tiberius reign from 12 AD Spring when he didn't get the title until 12 AD fall/winter?
I didn’t date it from Spring to Spring.
This is what I posted earlier:
“So for me the first regnal year of Tiberius' joint rule of the Provinces — Jewish Calendar Years, Non-Accession-Year, is Oct A.D. 12-Mar/April A.D. 13; with the fifteen year being March/April A.D. 26-March/April, A.D. 27.”
Jack Finegan in the Handbook of Biblical Chronology has Artaxerxes seventh year 458/457, with a Nisan to Nisan reckoning.
I also have the seventh year as 458/457, but with a Tishri to Tishri reckoning. As I use inclusive reckoning, (compare the count to Pentecost), 458/457 is the first year of the count.
1:57 writes:
“Again, I say, a 30 AD crucifixion places Christ's beginning ministry from 26 AD, which collides with John who preceded him, since AFTER John was imprisoned Jesus began. This doesn't synchronize with the 457 BC decree.
Jesus’ ‘public’ ministry did not begin after John was imprisoned; but His “Great Galilean” ministry did, but around a year after his baptism.
In regard to the chronology of Jesus’ three and a half ministry I basically follow A. T. Robinson’s “A Harmony of the Gospels”. He refers to Christ’s first year as “The Year of Obscurity” with a date of “Probably AD 26 and 27”.
As I date the start of the first half of Christ’s prophetic week around the fall and having John preaching around six months before the baptism of Jesus, dating Tiberius regnal years beginning in Nisan works well.
As I wrote earlier:
When the Antichrist comes up among the ten kings and makes the covenant in 9:27 then there is three and half years to the beginning of the Tribulation and seven to the return of Christ.
This is my present understanding but time will tell.
157
It is reasonable to assume everyone has their own prophetic scenario based on their own personal study. That's a good thing and I appreciate everybody sharing their thoughts.
Regarding the tribulation, I believe the tribulation (proper) doesn't begin until the 5th seal (Matt.24:15-28, Rev.6:9-11), which inaugurates the 2nd half of the final week. It is at that point the Beast's death stroke is healed, he then ascends out of the pit, kills the 2 Witnesses's (who inflicted the deadly wound in the 1st place, Rev.11:5). He sets up the abomination of desolation, proclaims himself as God, sets his hand against God's people, and begins his 42 month reign of terror, which will be interrupted by the day of the Lord.
This places the ministry of the 2W in the 1st half of the week (1260 days) where their work is responsible for seals 2-4. The obvious objection to this is Rev.11:9-14, which can be explained by the acknowledgment of inset chapters and prophetic "days". If needed be, I can elaborate further.
If anyone can find a copy of a 1980 sermon by David Antion called " Rebellion at the End", it would be well worth your time to listen to it. He fills in many of the details I left out. Also, it would be nice to read multi-part man's essay on the Beast of Revelation. I'm sure that could add to the story.
To John and BP8, it amazes me that with all of our knowledge we still see these prophecies differently but this is to be expected.
BP8, as I said to John, I think your prophecies are off. You have the events right but not their timing. Also, you don't touch on Dan 9:27, whereas John does, but gets his timing off.
John, re your 11:28 post, no, Mar 26, 31 AD could not have been Nisan14 that year, since the new moon of Mar 12/13 AD would have occurred before BEFORE the Spring equinox. It is an ancient rule that the beginning month cannot start before the equinox. So it appears that an intercalary month was used that year (supported by Dr. Hoeh in that article you cited), unless you can find evidence from the Jubilees, Sabbaticals and metonic cycle which disputes that.
John, that article by Franklin is not helpful. He just promotes 30AD while rambling on about other irrelevant subjects, omitting to examine the decree of Artaxerxes. It is interesting to note that Hoeh admitted just before he died to errors in his arguments for a Monday Pentecost and a change in the metonic cycle in the 2nd century, and that Ernest Martin should have been given credit for discovering that Pentecost is on a Sunday. Yet Martin split from WCG well before Hoeh and HWA could give him credit and say he was right 2 years later. There is a lesson in this for the church. Get your facts straight quickly because it could prevent a split.
John, you want to begin your count from 458 fall BC yet Artaxerxes only began his reign in 465 winter BC. Should his accession then not be moved ahead to 464 BC Spring, with 464-463 BC his first year, and ending with 457 BC Spring, near the completion of his 7th year, when Ezra departed Nisan 1, getting the decree before then obviously (some arguing that it came in Jan-Feb), close to the Spring equinox, when Persian kings officially began their regnal years? This makes 27 AD the beginning of his ministry, after 483 years of the 70 weeks prophecy have passed, his birth being in 4 BC, and his death in 31 AD.
It would be simple enough if you only believed that He rose from the dead after 3 full days and 3 full nights, that the "third day" expression in the NT was the work of English Protestants who were promoting a Fri-Sun doctrine, and that you gave some regard to the Didascalia, Epiphanius and Victorinus testimonies to a Wed crucifixion, but instead you are fishing for something else. We can't pick and choose the witnesses we want to believe, can we?
You also make a distinction in Christ's ministry, one public and the other Galilean. That is a first one for me. Are they not one and the same? Repent and believe the gospel?
Correct me if I'm wrong but my view is that John began in 26 AD (spring or fall? before he was 30?), baptized Christ in 27 AD, and then was executed 28 AD late summer. We see Him going south to be baptized, then returning north to begin His ministry, then going south again to keep Passover, at which time His ministry is gaining on John's, who would die in '28 AD?
So the sign you look for is a covenant made by Antichrist? That is good because I don't think many of us in the COGs understand this. Still, you say 7 years? Rev only speaks of 3 1/2.
Hi 9:30,
You write: “it amazes me that with all of our knowledge we still see these prophecies differently”.
I would say that it is 100% or nearly 100% that one will never persuade a reader of this site to change what they believed before they first started viewing this site.
In regard to “Mar 26, 31 AD could not have been Nisan14 that year” I took that date from the hebcal date converter, which uses Gregorian dates (hebcal.com - a Jewish website).
I am not that much interest in the specifics of the Hebrew calculated calendar as it didn’t exit in the Second Temple period.
You write:
“that the "third day" expression in the NT was the work of English Protestants who were promoting a Fri-Sun doctrine”
1Sa 20:5 And David said unto Jonathan, Behold, tomorrow is the new moon, and I should not fail to sit with the king at meat: but let me go, that I may hide myself in the field unto the third day at even.
1Sa 20:12a And Jonathan said unto David, O LORD God of Israel, when I have sounded my father about tomorrow any time, or the third day,
“third day. In the Hebrew idiom, this means the day after tomorrow (cf. verse 12)” (S. Goldman, revised by Rabbi Ephraim Oratz, Samuel, Soncino Books of the Bible, p.122).
I am not sure what you mean, but the “third day” is a Hebrew idiom.
As mentioned I believe in a Friday crucifixion in AD 30 and my dating of events leading up to are governed by it. I may be wrong, but I am yet to be convinced otherwise.
HWA had “the two trees”. If I had a saying it would be something like: “The Bible is ancient-near Eastern literature and it should be treated as such”. An accompanying jingle, based on a song title, would be: “what’s literally in the Bible [from a modern-western point of view], ain’t necessarily so”.
Part 2
You also wrote:
“You also make a distinction in Christ's ministry, one public and the other Galilean. That is a first one for me. Are they not one and the same? Repent and believe the gospel?”
What I said was, which may be confusing:
Jesus' ‘public' ministry did not begin after John was imprisoned; but His "Great Galilean" ministry did, but around a year after his baptism.
When I said public ministry what I meant was that Jesus’ three and a half year ministry did not begin with John being put in prison, but the Great Galilean ministry began with this event.
Mk 1:13 And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.
Mk 1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, JESUS CAME INTO GALILEE, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
“Between Christ’s baptism and temptation, on the one hand (1:9-13), and his arrival in Galilee, recorded in verse 14, on the other, there may have been a time interval of about a year” (William Hendriksen, Mark, NTC, p.55).
Jn 4:3 He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee.
Jn 4:43 Now after two days HE DEPARTED THENCE, AND WENT INTO GALILEE.
Jn 4:45 Then when he was come into Galilee, the Galilaeans received him, having seen all the things that he did at Jerusalem at the feast: for they also went unto the feast.
“I base this probability on the assumption that the departure for, and entrance into, Galilee, to begin the Great Galilean Ministry mentioned here in Mark, is the same as that to which John 4:3, 43 refers. In John it was followed soon afterward by what was probably the second Passover festival of Christ’s public ministry (John 5:1); hence the Passover of the year A. D. 28, proceeded, a year earlier, by the first Passover mentioned in John 2:13, 23” (William Hendriksen, Mark, NTC, fn. p. 55).
“The precise duration of this early ministry [“The year of Obscurity”] cannot be determined. Our Lord’s baptism must have been at least two months before the Passover, and may have been some weeks or months earlier. Then the highly successful ministry in Judea after Passover must have lasted several months (John 3:22; 4:1-3). If the “yet four months” in John 4:35 be understood to be not a common saying as to the usual interval between seedtime and harvest, but a statement that it was then just four months before harvest, that would make the Judean ministry extend eight months after the Passover. But this interpretation is upon the whole improbable, and we can only say that the opening ministry lasted several months. The time occupied makes very little difference for our understanding the events and discourses. ALL OF THE INCIDENTS DURING THIS PERIOD AFTER THE TEMPTATION ARE GIVEN IN JOHN’S GOSPEL. BUT FOR THE FOURTH GOSPEL WE SHOULD NO KNOW THAT JESUS DID NOT PLUNGE AT ONCE INTO THE GREAT GALILEAN MINISTRY” (A. T. Robinson, A Harmony of the Gospels, fn, p.19).
You write:
“So the sign you look for is a covenant made by Antichrist? That is good because I don't think many of us in the COGs understand this. Still, you say 7 years? Rev only speaks of 3 ½.”
BobThiel teaches about making a covenant that is broken after three and half years. He says it is a peace covenant, which may be a component, but I think I involves more of a building project.
Three and a half years after the covenant is made the Great Tribulation begins for me.
While I see Daniel 9:24-27 as a type-antitype prophecy involving Christ and the Antichrist it is informed by the OT Tribulation under Antiochus Epiphanes.
Part 3
“The two eastern kingdoms are marked by nobler metals; the two western [Greece and Rome], by baser; individualization and division appear in the latter, and it is they which produce the two Antichrists" (A. R. Fausset, Daniel, JFB, Vol.2, pt.2, pp.419-20).
TYPICAL FIRST STAGE
Da 11:28 Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart shall be against the holy covenant; and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land.
1 Macc 1:20-24 ... [Antiochus] went up to Israel and to Jerusalem with a strong force. He insolently invade the sanctuary and took away the golden altar, the lampstand ... [etc] ... Taking all this, he went back to his own country, after he had spoken with great arrogance and shed much blood.
ANTITYPICAL FIRST STAGE
2Th 2:4b so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
Da 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
Mk 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
"In the Olivet discourse of the synoptic Gospels it is probably this sinister personage [the Antichrist] who is referred to as "the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not" (to bdelugma tes eremoseos estekota opou ou dei, Mark 13:14)" (F. F. Bruce, 2 Thessalonians, Bruce M. Metzger, et al., General Editors, Word Biblical Commentary (WBC), (Nelson Reference & Electronic, 1982), p.xxxvii).
TYPICAL SECOND STAGE
Phase 1 - Beginning of OT Tribulation
Da 11:30 ... he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return,
1 Macc 1:29 ... the king sent to the cities of Judah a chief collector of tribute, and he came to Jerusalem with a large force.
1 Macc 1:30b ... he suddenly fell upon the city, dealt it a sever blow, and destroyed many people of Israel (NRSV).
Part 4
Phase 2 - Imposition of Paganism
Da 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice...
1 Macc 1:44 And the king sent letters by messengers to Jerusalem ... to forbid burnt offerings... (NRSV).
ANTITYPICAL SECOND STAGE
Phase 1 - Beginning of NT Tribulation
Da 9:26b ... And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
Da 12:7b it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.
The two Seleucid campaigns against Jerusalem are a 'type' for the future. The first campaign, with Antiochus personally involved, pictures the start of the 1290 days (Da 12:11) and the second pictures the start of the 1260 days (Da 12:7b).
In Antiochus' first campaign he 'invaded' the sanctuary, but did not put an end to the "daily sacrifice". In the Antichrist's first visit, which would appear to be after breaking the covenant, he 'invades' the sanctuary and he also puts an end to the "daily sacrifice".
Phase 2 - Imposition of Paganism
1 Macc 1:41-43 Then the king wrote to his whole kingdom that all should be one people, each abandoning his particular customs. All the Gentiles conformed to the command of the king, and many Israelites were in favor of his religion; they sacrificed to idols and profaned the sabbath. (NAB).
Rev 13:12 And he [the false prophet] exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast [the Antichrist], whose deadly wound was healed.
Just as Antiochus commanded his "whole kingdom" to be "one people" by requiring his subject people to observe "his religion," the Antichrist, through the false prophet, will cause the people in his empire to be "one people" by worshiping him.
TRIBULATION
1 Macc 1:62-64 But many in Israel stood firm and were resolved in their hearts not to eat unclean food. They chose to die rather than to be defiled by food or to profane the holy covenant; and they did die. Very great wrath came upon Israel.
Jer 30:5 For thus saith the LORD; We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear, and not of peace.
Jer 30:7a Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble;...
And just as Antiochus turned his wrath on the Sabbth-keeping Jews so the Antichrist will turn his wrath on all professing Sunday-keeping and Sabbath-keeping peoples who will not go along with "his religion."
OCCUPATION AND BUILDING
1 Macc 1:32 Then they built up the city of David with a high, massive wall, and it became their citadel.
1 Macc 1:33 & 35 There they installed a sinful race, perverse men ... and they became a great threat
Da 11:45 And he [the Antichrist] shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain;
930
You say my prophecies are off in their timing but you're not specific so I can't respond. You also say I haven't addressed Daniel 9:27 and Revelation speaks only of 3 and a half years?
I assure you, I believe the timelines of both Daniel 9:27 and the book of Revelation are based on the 70th week of years, the final 7 years before the return of Christ.
It is my contention that the key to timing all this out, and the ability to identify the events according to the timing is the 2 unique designations of time given in Revelation 11, 13 and corresponding chapters in Daniel.
In Revelation, the final 7 years are divided into 2 unique 3 and a half year periods. The first half of the week is termed 1260 "days". DAYS are a calculation of the sun's movement, and are a scriptural designation of the attributes and works of God. God is associated with LIGHT. We are called the children of the DAY, 1 Thes.5. The primary activities of that which is associated with and generated by God happen during the DAY, the 1260 days, the first half of the week.
The 2nd half of the week is termed 42 MONTHS, months being a calculation of the moon, moon = nighttime= darkness, which is associated with evil powers and events (see 1 Thess 5:3, Proverbs 4:19, Rom.13:12, Eph.5:6-11, 6:12, 1 John 2:9-11).
After the ministry of the 2 W is completed (the end of the 1260 days), the Beast rises from the pit, kills the 2 W, then continues for 42 months, at which at some point, the DAY of the Lord comes as a thief in the NIGHT!
Day verses Night? All prophetic events pertaining to the 70th week, whether it be in Daniel, Revelation, or the Olivet prophecy, can be divided according to this twofold timeline. I can give examples but the list is long.
Gotta follow MPM again:
PART 1
April 7 1:17 PM; April 11 3:34 PM; April 17 10:24 AM; April 21 9:30 PM
“How about the Didascalia for extra proof?… Not only that, the Didascalia declares that the crucifixion took place on the 4th day of the week, Wednesday, just as HWA taught.”
“…Testimonies from the Didascalia… support a Wednesday crucifixion… The apostle Peter states it clearly in the Didascalia…”
IDK how you can appeal to the Didascalia as support for HWA’s Wednesday crucifixion theory, since it actually undermines that claim when read carefully.
1. Yes, the Didascalia suggests Passover was observed on a Tuesday night, which already puts it at odds with the Gospels. This makes it a questionable foundation for establishing a precise timeline of events, as the Gospels place Passover on a Thursday night.
2. Despite the altered Passover timeline, the Didascalia explicitly places the crucifixion on Preparation Day (Friday). It’s clear Wednesday is when Jesus is held in custody—not when He's crucified. This directly contradicts the HWA's theory.
3. The claim the Didascalia records the apostle Peter saying Jesus died on Wednesday and rose on Saturday is simply false. The text doesn't make such a statement. That idea is being read into the document, not drawn from it.
So, the Didascalia doesn’t support HWA’s position. In fact, it weakens it. It seems like there’s an attempt to take a historically unreliable and questionable text, ignore the parts that contradict your theory, and then claim it as supporting evidence.
Additionally, Hoeh cites Walther thus:
Astounding proof exists of these attempts to change the day of the resurrection and of the crucifixion. James A. Walther, in an article entitled "The Chronology of Passion Week," in the June 1958 Journal of Biblical Literature, mentions that numerous Catholic writers for centuries maintained that Jesus ate the Passover Tuesday night—that early Wednesday morning He was taken by the Jewish mob. He declares: "References in the Didascalia, in Epiphanius, in Victorinus of Pettau… support the Tuesday [night] Passover dating and the subsequent arrest of Jesus in the morning hours of Wednesday." (Hoeh, "The Crucifixion Was Not on Friday" p. 14)
However, when you consult Walther’s actual article, you’ll see it’s not as clear-cut as Hoeh presents it. Here’s what Walther actually says:
“References in the Didascalia, in Epiphanius, in Victorinus of Pettau, and in the Book of Adam and Eve support the Tuesday Passover dating and the subsequent arrest of Jesus in the morning hours of Wednesday.”
Hoeh omits the Book of Adam and Eve, which is a significant omission. This is a late, non-canonical text with no historical value when it comes to reconstructing the chronology of Jesus' Passion Week. Removing this source makes the evidence seem stronger than it really is. Moreover, Walther himself doesn’t use these sources as "proof"—he merely notes they can be interpreted in favor of a Tuesday Passover theory as he draws on earlier scholarship (eg French studies such as Annie Jaubert’s work on Essene calendar theory) to suggest Jesus may have followed an alternative calendar in which Passover was observed earlier than the official Temple date. Importantly, even within that model, the crucifixion is still placed on Friday not Wednesday.
PART 2
When we look at the sources themselves, their limitations become clear:
* Epiphanius (Panarion 50) discusses debates around the timing of Passover observance, but doesn’t comment on the specific chronology of Jesus' final week. He never mentions a Tuesday Passover or Wednesday crucifixion.
* Victorinus of Pettau (in his Commentary on the Apocalypse) follows the traditional Friday crucifixion timeline and affirms the "day of preparation" (Friday), the Sabbath, and the Lord's Day (Sunday) as the days of Christ’s suffering, rest and resurrection. This supports the Friday-Sunday timeline, not the Wednesday theory.
* The Book of Adam and Eve is a symbolic, apocryphal text that offers no historical insight into the events of Jesus' final week. It’s not a reliable source for chronological reconstruction.
In the end, these sources don't provide reliable testimony for a Tuesday Passover or a Wednesday crucifixion. They reflect later theological and symbolic frameworks, not early historical data. Even Walther himself isn’t claiming these sources as definitive proof—he only suggests a Tuesday Passover model is possible, given some of the tensions in the Gospels. Thus, Hoeh’s claim of “astounding proof” goes far beyond what the evidence actually supports and there’s no solid, early evidence confirming a Wednesday crucifixion at all.
What blasphemies you people write!
Judging by your arguments, you seem to think that you know everything.
He who is right in his own eyes appears correct until someone comes along to correct him.
Is 2:48:00 off their rocker? Schizophrenic? Can't you "see"?
6:02
Quoting Proverbs 18:17 actually undercuts your objection, not ours. The point of that verse is that a claim that sounds right at first often falls apart when it’s examined. That’s exactly what’s happening here. HWA’s Wednesday–Saturday theory has been repeated for decades, but when the sources used to support it are checked carefully, they don’t say what’s being claimed.
And calling that “blasphemy” isn't addressing the issue—it's avoiding it. If the evidence really supports your position, then it should be straightforward to show where our arguments are wrong. If not, then Proverbs 18:17 is doing exactly what it’s meant to do—testing whether a claim actually holds up and exposing falsehoods.
If you want to engage, then deal with the sources and the arguments not with false accusations.
Post a Comment