Their witness does not agree

[Athetotheist]

"Now the chief priests and all the council sought testimony against Jesus to put him to death, but found none. For many bore false witness against him, but their testimonies did not agree." (Mark 14:55-56)

If the testimony of those witnesses was to be rejected because it didn't agree, how can anyone be blamed for rejecting the resurrection accounts in the gospels for the same reason?

[FWI]

RESPONSE: However, Matthew, Mark, and Luke have Jesus being crucified a day later than John does. Day of Preparation verses Passover.

This is not correct! There were two preparation days or times recorded in John (excluding the weekly Sabbath preparation). The first was the preparation for the Days of Unleavened Bread. Where, each household would need to rid their homes of any leavened bread and leavening agents, before the arrival of the 14th day of Nisan or the Passover Day (Exodus 12:18-20 & Deut. 16:4).

Then, there was a preparation of the Passover lambsWhich occurred on the 14th day of Nisan or the Passover Day. This is where the people would bring the lambs to the temple to be prepared for a sacrifice. Exodus 12:6-8 gives an example of the first Passover in Egypt.

So, the reference of the preparation day for the Days of Unleavened Bread is recorded beginning in John 13. Then, the reference for the preparation for the Passover lambs is in John 19:14 and is on the 14th of NisanHence, the Christ was crucified during the same time that the Passover lambs were being killed or the 14th of Nisan and not before this dateThis is agreed upon in: Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42 and Luke 23:54.

[Difflugia]

RESPONSE: However, Matthew, Mark, and Luke have Jesus being crucified a day later than John does. Day of Preparation verses Passover.

This is not correct!

Whatever you think "Day of Preparation" means in each Gospel, John's Jesus was crucified before any of the Synoptic Jesuses.

According to all three Synoptics (Mt. 26:17, Mk. 14:16, Lk. 22:15), Jesus and the twelve ate the Passover meal as the Last Supper. They completed the meal before Jesus was arrested.

John 13:1 says that the Last Supper was a meal sometime before Passover. The morning following his arrest, John makes clear in 18:28 that it wasn't yet time for the Passover meal (ESV):

Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor's headquarters. It was early morning. They themselves did not enter the governor's headquarters, so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover.

[FWI]

John's Jesus was crucified before any of the Synoptic Jesuses.

No, this just isn't true, no matter what may be theorized. All four gospels and numerous outside sources agree that the Christ died towards the end of the 14th day of Nisan or the day the Passover lambs were sacrificed (Jewish calendar).

According to all three Synoptics (Mt. 26:17, Mk. 14:16, Lk. 22:15), Jesus and the twelve ate the Passover meal as the Last Supper. They completed the meal before Jesus was arrested.

Sorry, this is also in error! The Christ did not eat of the Passover lamb before he was crucified. Because, he was killed and buried before this meal occurred. Where, the problem is a preconceive notion of what the term Passover means in GreekThe Greek word Pascha (G3957) can be defined as: the paschal sacrifice, the paschal lamb, the paschal meal and the paschal feast. Where, the Hebrew word Pecach (H6453) means the same as the Greek word. Therefore:

* The paschal sacrifice could only be performed on the 14th day of Nisan. This was a command from God! However, the time period was not written in stone. Where, during the first century A.D., the event occurred in the temple between (about) 11:00 am thru (about) 4:00 pm. So, the meal that the Christ and the others ate was not the paschal meal, because the meal they ate occurred at the beginning of the 14th of Nisan. The actual paschal meal didn't happened until the beginning of the 15th of Nisan and this ritual will occur again at beginning of the 15th of Nisan or the beginning of April 9, 2020

* The paschal feast or the Feast of Unleavened Bread began on the 14th of Nisan and lasted until the 21st of Nisan, but not including the 21st day or for seven days (Ex. 12:17-20). Also, it must be understood that God declared that a day begins in the evening (Gen. 1:5). Where, the Israelite's new day began at sundown, not midnightSo, on the first day of ULB, which was a high holy day and would also become a memorial to be remembered throughout the Israelite's generations, is the meal that the Christ told the apostles to prepare for and is recorded in Matthew, Mark and LukeWhere, John doesn't include the events leading up to the Last Supper, except to state that the supper had ended. But, the writings arrive at the garden, where the Christ was arrested and eventually killed, just like the other three gospels doThe next day (the 15th of Nisan) is when the paschal meal was eaten. The Christ would not disobey or permit his followers to disobey his Heavenly Father and eat a paschal meal before its prescribed time! The truth is that the paschal meal wasn't that important, as related to the big picture. The most important event was putting the blood on the home's door posts and lintel, so that the death angel would pass-over their houses and not kill the first born within themBecause, if any Israelite left their houses, they would suffer the same consequences, as the Egyptians.

* So, another important point is that God commanded that the partakers of the paschal meal could not leave their homes, until morning (Ex. 12:22-25)! Since, the Christ and the apostles did leave, it is clear that the meal was not the paschal mealSo, to suggest that the Christ and the apostles willingly disobeyed God and sinned, is way beyond the reality of the event. No matter, what others claim.

* There is another law that would need to be disobeyed if your analogy has any merit. God tells the congregation of Israel that every head of a household shall take a paschal lamb, according to the house of his father (Exodus 12:3-11). How could the apostles have done this? Were they expected to ignore their loved ones? Where, there is no indication that the family members of the apostles were invited to this event. They (wives and children) would also be in Jerusalem at the same time! What about them? No, the Christ wouldn't do this. After, the Christ was arrested and killed the apostles would have plenty of time to gather with their families or others for the paschal meal. Because, it wasn't until Pentecost that they would begin to understand that they wouldn't be involved in a paschal meal anymore

[JehovahsWitness]

RESPONSE: However, Matthew, Mark, and Luke have Jesus being crucified a day later than John does. Day of Preparation verses Passover.

This is not correct!

Whatever you think "Day of Preparation" means in each Gospel, John's Jesus was crucified before any of the Synoptic Jesuses.

According to all three Synoptics (Mt. 26:17, Mk. 14:16, Lk. 22:15), Jesus and the twelve ate the Passover meal as the Last Supper. They completed the meal before Jesus was arrested.

John 13:1 says that the Last Supper was a meal sometime before Passover. The morning following his arrest, John makes clear in 18:28 that it wasn't yet time for the Passover meal (ESV):

Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor's headquarters. It was early morning. They themselves did not enter the governor's headquarters, so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover.

From what I can see you have yet to establish why John could not have been refering to the festival of loaves (cakes) rather than the the Passover meal*.

* both of which are centered on eating in case you want again to raise the "eating a festival" objection
(which I enjoyed, it made me smile) .

[Athetotheist]

All four gospels and numerous outside sources agree that the Christ died towards the end of the 14th day of Nisan or the day the Passover lambs were sacrificed (Jewish calendar).........The Christ did not eat of the Passover lamb before he was crucified. Because, he was killed and buried before this meal occurred.

"Now you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month. Then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at twilight.....Then they shall eat the flesh on that night.....You shall let none of it remain until morning...." (Exodus 12:6, 8, 10)

"Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said to him, 'Where do you want us to go and prepare that you may eat the Passover?'" (Mark 14:12)

"Now on the first of the Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying to him, 'Where do you want us to prepare for you to eat the Passover?'" (Matthew 26:17)

"Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, 'Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat.'" (Luke:22:7-8)

How could Jesus be crucified before the eating of the Passover meal when the Passover lamb had to be eaten on the night immediately following the day it was killed and the synoptics place the killing of the Passover lamb on the day before the crucifixion?

[Difflugia]

From what I can see you have yet to establish why John could not have been refering to the festival of loaves (cakes) rather than the the Passover meal*.

* both of which are centered on eating in case you want again to raise the "eating a festival" objection
(which I enjoyed, it made me smile) .

I suppose he could. The problematical assumption that I'm making is that John and the other evangelists wanted their writing to be understood. Apologists, on the other hand, aren't bothered by such trifles.

The Achilles heel of the various forms of inerrancy apologetics is that any possible reading, no matter how nonsensical, is as reasonable as (or often more reasonable than) any other. Greek isn't idiomatically much different than other western languages, including English. Though there are exceptions, if it sounds weird in English, it probably sounds weird in Greek and isn't something someone would write. There are certainly exceptions, but I see no reason to think one applies in John.

All three Synoptics refer to the Last Supper as the Passover. John goes out of his way to make sure we (as the audience) know that it's not. John 13:1 mentions specifically that the Last Supper was to take place "before the freast of the Passover." If that's not what he meant, then there was no reason to even include that clause. In fact, if John wasn't intentionally contradicting the known tradition that the Last Supper was the Passover, there was no reason to include that clause. It's there because John means it.

Then when we get to the crucifixion, John once again wanted to make sure we know that the Passover meal hadn't happened yet. If they already ate the Passover meal, then John 18:28 isn't necessary regardless of the grammar. No other Gospels include that detail. In the other Gospels, Jesus simply goes from being questioned by Caiaphas to standing before Pilate. If you think that John might have meant the "festival of cakes" instead of the meal, then what does 18:28 tell us? Why is it there? Furthermore, if John means what you claim he did, then he was guaranteeing he would be misunderstood. Even if one could legitimately be said to "eat the festival of cakes," then it would simply be an ambiguity that John chose not to explain. Everywhere else, though, John explains parts of his narrative scene that might be confusing. Just read the earlier paragraphs of chapter 18. John explains everything that might not be clear. Here is John 18:18 that is there to explain, first, why there was a crowd, and second, why Peter was there with them.

Now the servants and the officers were standing there, having made a fire of coals; for it was cold; and they were warming themselves: and Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself.

John 18:28 is a similar kind of narrative setup. With a straightforward reading in which one eats meals and not festivals, 18:28 is a reminder to John's audience that the Passover meal hasn't happened yet. John is setting Jesus up to be slaughtered with the lambs as the Lamb of God.

Let's assume for a minute, however, that you're right. Jesus already ate the meal that the Synoptics called the Passover and 18:28 is about someone eating a festival. In your opinion, what was John trying to tell us with that verse? Why is it there? Why did John render it in a way that is almost impossible to not misunderstand without having the other Gospels to compare with, especially considering that the other Gospels use the phrase "eat the Passover" to mean eating the Passover meal (Mark 14:14, Matthew 26:17, Luke 22:11)?

[JehovahsWitness]

Let's assume for a minute, however, that you're right. ... what was John trying to tell us with that verse?

That Jesus appeared before Pilate on the morning of the 14th, the day before the first day of the festival of cakes (loaves).

Why is it there?

It's there presumably for the same reason the other three gospels chose to included time markers, to provide some reference, to pinpoint when Jesus appeared before Pilate.

[JehovahsWitness]

Why did John render it in a way that is almost impossible to not misunderstand without having the other Gospels to compare with...?

I dont think John is making things unduly difficult for the reader at all. He referred to the evening meal Which we can reasonable conclude was the Passover evening meal (compare John 13:1, 2) of the 14th, gave us many details not included in the other gospels of the night's events and tells us that Jesus appeared before Pilate early the next morning. I think he's doing us a service by indicating that there was more to the Passover than a single evening meal.

In any case, none of us can be in the mind of the writer and say for sure why he made his editorial decisions but it's said that about 92% of Johns gospel is unique, so evidently the writer was deliberately seeking to fill in any gaps in the collective narrative of the others. Mark is the most helpful when it comes to Jewish tradition (indeed it is Mark that explains the "Passover" consisted of two seperate religious traditions) , John rarely concerns himself with such explanations, but he still does us the courtesy of placing the events in a timeframe.

Perhaps we might wish he was more precise in his terminology, or that his side remarks (especially about timing) had a little more detail but that's no reason to assume the reading that most adequately displays a complete ignorance of the festival in question. One needn't cut of ones proverbial nose because one doesn't know enough about one's face.





JW

[Difflugia]

Let's assume for a minute, however, that you're right. ... what was John trying to tell us with that verse?

That Jesus appeared before Pilate on the morning of the 14th, the day before the first day of the festival of cakes (loaves).

The whole thrust of your argument is that "eat the Passover" is ambiguous. If John is making a distinction between the Seder and rest of the festival, then he knew his statement was ambiguous and can't be taken to mean what you think it does. If he's not making a distinction, then 18:28 means that the Seder hasn't been eaten yet. Either way, the argument fails.

[JehovahsWitness]

The whole thrust of your argument is that "eat the Passover" is ambiguous.

It is; if it wasn't we wouldn't be discussing it. That said however if you read John 13:1, 2 (which refers to "the evening meal", read the narrative and which clearly indicates that Jesus stood before Pilate the next morning and have a little bit of knowledge that the festival wasnt over, there is no reason to conclude the four gospel narratives cannot be harmonized.

If John is making a distinction between the Seder and rest of the festival, then he knew his statement was ambiguous and can't be taken to mean what you think it does.

Huh?!

I'm sorry I dont understand your point, if John makes a distinction (which he does) between the evening meal and the festival then...he cannot be preferring to the festival because ...it would be ambiguous? I'm sorry could you explain your point a little better. I cannot address this point since I dont understand it.




JW