A forum to discuss Bible Translations

When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Discuss the Renewed Covenant and Paul's writings, or produce your own for discussion!
robdavid
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:36 am

When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby robdavid » Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:27 pm

A Chapter From A Brothers Book. He Has Lived In Israel For 12 Years.

Mat 27:64 Therefore, command that the grave be secured until the third day, that His disciples may not come by night and steal Him away, and may say to the people, He is raised from the dead. And the last deception will be worse than the first.

Mat 27:65 And Pilate said to them, You have the guards. Go and take precautions as you know.
Mat 27:66 And they departed and took precautions by the grave and set a seal upon that stone together with the guards.

So it was commanded that a guard would be placed at the tomb of Yahshua UNTIL the third day from His crucifixion according to Scripture. And was the guard still present when the great earthquake happened right after His resurrection?

Mat 28:11 And they, having gone, behold, some of the guard coming into the city reported to the chief priests all things that occurred.
Mat 28:12 And being assembled with the elders, and taking counsel, they gave enough silver to the soldiers,
Mat 28:13 saying, Say that his disciples came and stole him by night, while we slept.
Mat 28:14 And if this is heard by the governor, we will persuade him and he will not make trouble for you.
Mat 28:15 And taking the silver, they did as they were instructed. And this report was spread by the Jews until today.

Most undoubtedly, the guards were there when the great earthquake happened right after Yahshua’s resurrection, so it stands to reason since they were only stationed UNTIL the third day that Yahshua had to rise within three days of early morning while it was still dark on the first day of the week, which can only put the crucifixion on Thursday afternoon, or day 5 of the weekly cycle. In looking at the above biblical timeframe let us not forget the scripture in Luke 24:21 where the two disciples meet Yahshua in the afternoon of the first day of the week just hours after His resurrection and clearly tell Him that day is “the third day since the crucifixion”.

Luk 24:21b But then with all these things, this third day comes today since these things happened.

So again most dogmatically from Scripture we can see counting back three days from Sunday afternoon (the first day of the week) can only bring you to a Thursday (day 5) crucifixion.

However, if He was placed in the tomb before sunset as Scripture states (Luk 23:51-55) and then, He was resurrected Saturday evening but before Sunday morning, as Scripture states “when Mary came to the tomb while it was still dark”, and if He died on a Wednesday as some falsely believe, then He actually would have been in the tomb a fourth day, as from Wednesday afternoon before sunset to Saturday night or early Sunday morning would have been into the fourth day, which would not fit Scripture as we have seen that it clearly stated He would rise ‘ON’ the third day Not after it, as Ps 16:10-11 has shown; He had to be resurrected before the 4th day for His physical body not to be corrupted.

That is the reason that some churches have tried to say that Yahshua was resurrected late Sabbath afternoon, to fit the three days’ timeframe, however, it just does not fit Scripture, as that would not have Yahshua being resurrected on the Feast of Firstfruits, as Scripture plainly shows, He was the wave sheaf; and again starting from Sunday afternoon (the first day of the week) when Yahshua met the two disciples on the road to Emmaus and counting back three days, no matter how you count it will not bring you to Wednesday afternoon. Counting back one day from Sunday, will bring you to Saturday, counting back two days from Sunday will bring you to Friday and counting back three days from Sunday will bring you to Thursday.

In addition, if He died on a Wednesday and was resurrected Saturday evening, then that would have Him being resurrected on the 4th day not on the third day as Scripture states. As we have seen from Scripture there was a great earthquake directly after His death on Thursday afternoon, and another great earthquake directly after His resurrection early morning while still dark the first day of the week.

Let me also say that I fully believe that Yahshua fulfilled His promise to be 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb (Math 12:38-40), but let me also say that in the Hebrew language NO WHERE does it state that time frame has to be exactly 72 hours. It is not being honest with the Scriptures to say that Jonah, according to Scripture, was exactly 72 hours in the fish’s belly.

If you look up the word “day” in Hebrew which is “Yom” it can refer to the whole 24 hour period from one sunset to another, it can refer to just the daylight portion of a day, which will vary according to the time of year, it can refer to a portion of a day and it could also refer to an extended time period such as “the Day of Yahweh”. This is not subjective but simply the biblical meaning of the word “Yom”. It is similar in English, as if you stated that Don was in Miami for a day, no one would take it to mean that I stayed in Miami exactly 24 hours. Look at the following scripture to prove this point.

Deu 21:22 And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is executed, and you hang him on a tree,
Deu 21:23a his body shall not remain all night on the tree; but surely, you shall bury him the same day. For he that is hanged is a reproach to Elohim.

According to the Torah, a person crucified around 3:00pm must be taken down and buried THE SAME DAY! The day he dies is inclusive in the count of his death.

This is exactly what happened to Yahshua. He was hung on a tree from 12:00 noon to between 2:00 and 3:00pm. Yet Deuteronomy clearly states that the day of the person being crucified is inclusive of being day one of the count of his death. People who use a Wednesday crucifixion never take this into account and start their count from sunset Wednesday missing a whole daylight portion according to the reckoning of time in Scripture.

So from the daylight portion of the 5th day of the week, which the Romans named Thursday, to the night portion of the first day of the week, which the Romans called Saturday evening is 3 days and 3 nights. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are 3 days and Thursday night, Friday night, and Saturday night are 3 nights.

Some who believe in a Wednesday crucifixion try to purport that the Holy Day was on Thursday and that there is a mysterious non mentioned day between the holy Day and the weekly Sabbath. They use the following scripture in Luke 23, to try to prove their point and say that there is a two day window between verses 55 and 56, but let’s look at the scripture and see if the Bible really is coming to the conclusion that is being proposed.

Luk 23:53 And taking it down, he wrapped it in linen, and placed it in a quarried tomb, where no one was ever yet laid.
Luk 23:54 And it was Preparation Day, and a Sabbath was coming on.
Luk 23:55 And having followed, also the women who were accompanying Him out of Galilee, watched the tomb, and how His body was placed.
Luk 23:56 And returning, they prepared spices and ointment. And indeed they rested on the Sabbath, according to the commandment.

If we just read the scripture without adding anything into it, NOWHERE would it even remotely hint that there is a 2 day time difference somewhere between verses 53-54 and 55-56. And if I believe that proposed theory, that this Sabbath mentioned in Luke 56 was the weekly Sabbath, then I would have to believe as Christianity teaches of a Friday crucifixion, because clearly this Sabbath, which was the Holy Day (John 19:31) happened directly after the crucifixion, and there is not any hint of a 2 day time period between verses 53-54 and 55-56. Yahshua died between 2:00 and 3:00pm.

The women watched where His body was laid and returned to their home and prepared spices, before the Holy Day began at sunset Thursday, and then rested on the Holy day Friday and the weekly Sabbath on Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. Then, Saturday evening after sunset, when the Sabbath was over and the first day of the week had begun, they purchased and prepared the rest of the burial spices and went early morning while it was still dark to the tomb where Yahshua had just been resurrected.

If Yahshua died on a Wednesday and the Holy day was Thursday, then the women would have surely returned Friday morning to the tomb and would not have waited until Sunday morning. So anxious were they to get to the Tomb that they actually arrived so early on the first day of the week, that it was still dark.

It is inconceivable that if there was a day between the Holy Day on Thursday and the weekly Sabbath on Saturday that Mary would not have gone to the tomb on that interim day. In Jewish culture burying and caring for the dead is something that is done immediately, and if at all possible the very same day the person died as we have seen from Deut 21:23.

The only reason that Mary could not anoint the body directly after the crucifixion was that she didn’t have either enough spices or enough time to do it. Luk 23:56 shows that she did have some spices and started to prepare before the Holy Day, directly after the crucifixion, but had to wait until both the Holy Day was over and the weekly Sabbath before she could purchase the rest of the spices and go to the tomb early Sunday morning while still dark.

Joh 20:1 But on the first of the Sabbaths (The seven week count to Shavuot), Mariam Magdalene came early to the tomb, darkness yet being on it. And she saw the stone had been removed from the tomb.
Mar 16:1 And the Sabbath passing, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Salome, bought spices, so that coming they might anoint Him.
Mar 16:2 And very early on the first of the week, the sun having risen, they came upon the tomb.

The fact that she even went to the tomb while it was still dark proves that she wanted to get there as soon as possible, so if there was a day (Friday) between the two Sabbaths, then certainly she would have went on Friday to the tomb, which is actually more proof that there was no mysterious day in between the 2 Sabbaths.

The biblical fact is that the last Passover (supper) happened on Wednesday evening and Yahshua was crucified on Thursday afternoon and sunset Thursday started the Holy Day of Unleavened Bread and sunset Friday started the weekly Sabbath.

Then, after the Sabbath was over (Saturday evening after sunset) Mary bought spices as Mark 16:1 tells us and prepared them and came to the tomb to see Yahshua’s body while it was still dark early Sunday morning, but He was already resurrected a short time before that right before the great earthquake that is mentioned in Math 28:2 before sunrise of the first day of the week, which was also the beginning of the Feast of Firstfruits or Resurrection Day.

Now the next question arises could she have bought spices Saturday evening? If you look in the Zonderman study bible you will clearly see in the study note for Mark 16:1, it shows that markets would have been open Saturday evening, after the Sabbath would have ended, and it notes that this was Saturday evening that this buying of burial spices took place.

Why would the New Testament even mention this fact? Again, you have to look at the set apart day this happened on, the Feast of Firstfruits. As the Pharisees were preparing their wave sheaf for the next morning by binding it and beating it and putting it through the fire, as they did with Yahshua the true wave sheaf, Mary, one of His most beloved disciples, was preparing for the wave sheaf by buying ointments and frankincense and sweet smelling fragrances for the perfect true wave sheaf ceremony. It shows the complete dichotomy between those who believe and those who didn’t. The Pharisees were beating the wavesheaf omer, as Mary was buying perfume to anoint the wavesheaf omer.

Also, look at the following scripture in Amos to again prove that buying and selling went on in the evening after the Sabbath ended.

Amo 8:5 saying, When will the new moon have passed, so that we may buy grain? Or the Sabbath, so that we may open the wheat, making smaller the ephah, and making greater the shekel, and to falsify the deceitful balances,

In these days the evil merchants were counting down the minutes to open their sacks (many lived right at their store) to be able to cheat the people for another week. In context, showing the greed of the merchants, it would make no sense if they were waiting another 12 full hours after the Sabbath to sell the next day. In the Hebrew mindset it is clearly showing they were opening the sacks as the sun was setting and a new day was starting.

Also, if you look up the word for Sabbath in Mark 16:1, it is the word in the Hebrew and Aramaic “Shabbat” which is the weekly Sabbath, not “Sabaton”, which would be the Holy Day Sabbath. In the Greek, the word is the same, but in the Aramaic and Hebrew, it is conclusive, so with that said, to develop a whole 2 days between verses one and two that does not exist, is just not being honest with the scripture.

Did you ever wonder why the Feast of Firstfruits is a not a Holy Day? After understanding the fulfillment of the wave sheaf as I explained above, it is simply for the reason that if it were a Holy Day, then Mary could not have bought the spices Saturday evening and went to anoint Him Sunday morning as the wave sheaf offering, this again should show the correct time sequence. Look at Math 28:1 in the original manuscript:

Mat 28:1 But after the Sabbaths, at the dawning into the first of the Sabbaths, (This was the day of firstfruits and the beginning of the 7 week count to Shavuot) Mary the Magdalene and the other Mary came to gaze upon the grave.

This scripture clearly shows that there were 2 Sabbaths between the crucifixion and resurrection, but again, never mentions another day in between these two Sabbaths, and clearly shows the importance of the resurrection being on the first of the Sabbaths or day of first fruits, and the first of the 7 week count of Sabbaths to Shavuot. The day the wave sheaf as the first- fruit was offered up to Yahweh and accepted by Him. Then, after the first-fruit offering was accepted, only then could the rest of the harvest ending at Shavuot also be accepted. Also, no new grain could even be eaten until the wave-sheaf offering was accepted by Yahweh on the Feast of Firstfruits or Resurrection Day.

Lev 23:14 And you shall not eat bread, nor roasted grain, nor fresh ears, until this same day, until you have brought the offering of your Elohim; it is a never ending statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings.
1Co 15:23 But each in his own order: Messiah, the firstfruit; afterward those of Messiah at His coming.
Rom 11:16 Now if the first-fruit is holy, so also the lump. And if the root is holy, so also the branches.
Joh 20:16-17 Yahshua said to her, Mariam! Turning around, she said to Him, Rabboni! (that is to say, My Great One). Yahshua said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father. But go to My brothers and say to them, I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and My Elohim, and your Elohim.

So where do people come up with the reasoning that Yahshua had to be crucified on a Wednesday? It is by misinterpreting one minute scripture in the book of Daniel.

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm a covenant with the many for one week. And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease.

Now, first of all, there is a reasonable debate as to whether this scripture even refers to the Messiah at all. In Hebrew grammar, the personal pronoun most usually goes back to the last person mentioned and in this case that would have been the anti-messiah of Daniel 9:26 and not the Messiah at all. There are many people who believe that this scripture talks about a 7 year agreement that will come with the anti-messiah and the Arab nations right before Yahshua’s return.

Secondly, even if this scripture was talking about the Messiah and not the anti-messiah, it is a 70 weeks of years prophecy and the week mentioned in Daniel 9:27, regardless of who it is referring to, is speaking about a week of 7 years, not a literal week of 7 days, so nowhere would it in any case be saying the Messiah had to die on a Wednesday, but rather, if it was referring to the Messiah, it would be saying that in the midst of His 7 year ministry, He would cause the sacrifice to end by His death. This happened in the third year of His ministry and would fall within the guidelines of this Hebrew word for midst, which simply means the middle part, but not exactly, directly, in the middle. According to this Hebrew word, if this scripture was referring to Yahshua, He would have fulfilled it as long as He was cut off in either the 3rd ,4th, or 5th year of His ministry, which He was.

There is no other scripture that even remotely hints that the Messiah had to die on a Wednesday. If we are honest from Scripture, a Thursday crucifixion is much more accurate. Also, if you simply go back and look at a new moon calendar, you will find out that in 30 AD, the year of crucifixion, that according to the new moon conjunction, the 14th day of Aviv (Passover) fell on a Thursday, with the Passover meal on Wednesday evening. The 15th day of Aviv was started sunset Thursday to sunset Friday and the weekly Sabbath would have followed. Go to any moon phase website to prove this for yourself.

In 30 AD, the year of crucifixion the Jewish Talmud mentions 4 great miracles that happened starting right after Yahshua’s death for 40 full years until the destruction of the Temple in 70AD. Each night the great menorah was lite and went out by itself. The great Hekel doors of the temple that took 20 men to open or close them opened on themselves for 40 full years after the crucifixion starting on 30 AD. Also, the white and black lot for the scapegoat on Yom Kippur came up black every time from 30 AD to 70 AD, and the red string that the High Priest would wear in the Holy of Holies and if the sacrifice was accepted by Yahweh would turn white, never turned white anymore from 30 AD to 70 AD.

If one is starting the new moon by visually sighting a crescent moon, then looking at when the crescent was sighted in 30 AD, you are back to a Friday crucifixion, which simply is not possible according to Scripture.

Lassie1865
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:06 pm

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Lassie1865 » Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:39 pm

In Leviticus the uneaten portions of the lamb were to be burned; they could not exist until morning. Yahusha's body must have been 'vaporized' during the first night. Was there not a full eclipse of the moon the the day of crucifixion?

Hephzibah
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:50 am

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Hephzibah » Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:27 pm

The Talmud states that the last stone drawn was in the fall of 69 A.D. and that it, like the 39 before was black, and prophesied a bad year. Counting back from there, you can see that the first of the 40 year predictions for a bad year, was drawn in the fall of 30 A.D. That means that the stone drawn for the year 30 itself was a white stone, and the last prediction of a good year until the temple was destroyed. John records that in the fall prior to the crucifixion, Caiaphas drew a black stone, meaning that year 31 would be a bad year.

Although the temple was destroyed in the year 70, its destruction was not completed until 71, as Josephus records that it housed many surviving Jewish people for some time after the siege.

Also, the scriptures state that the women rested the Sabbath, and then bought spices, and then rested according to the commandment. When Mary got there just as the 7th day Sabbath was ending, He was already gone. It was a literal 72 hours. Yeshua stated that there were 12 hours in a day, and He said that He would be in the grave 3 days AND 3 NIGHTS. The Jews reckoned twilight as the last hour of one day and the first hour of the next day. Also the term dawn, was the coming of one of the great lights, the moon dawned just like the sun does.

It has been years since I researched this, and I could be wrong, but this is the conclusion I came to at that time. ;)

User avatar
Swalchy
Site Admin
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Swalchy » Sat Nov 09, 2013 4:13 pm

The Messiah doesn't state that He would be "in the grave" for three days and three nights (nor did he say that He would be dead for three days and three nights). The "heart of the land" does not equal/mean/indicate being dead/in the grave.

The four eyewitness accounts all agree that the Messiah died on παρασευκη (MAtt 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:14, 31, 42), which is Greek for Friday, and nothing else. Even though it's "translated" as "Preparation day", that is a complete butchering of what the word meant for Greek readers at the time, and for subsequent centuries, even down to our present time.

See the lengthy discussion I had with WilliamPriebe on this very same topic in the Acts 20:7 thread - Link
TWTY website and forum Administrator.

Please respect everyone, and try to not get too heated when discussing one's point of view :)

Hephzibah
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:50 am

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Hephzibah » Sat Nov 09, 2013 7:13 pm

According to Mark 9:31, he would be killed and then after that he was killed he would rise the third day.

The Greek has to many errors to be the original. And there are 2 Sabbaths in the texts, with a day in between. But I will read your other post! :) thanks for the input!

User avatar
Swalchy
Site Admin
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Swalchy » Sat Nov 09, 2013 7:35 pm

I like how people can appeal to one section of text (in your case here, Mark 9:31), and then when another section of text contradicts their belief, that section then "has too many errors" in it: how do you know it's not the part that you appeal to that contains the error?

Or perhaps (in this case, definitely), neither section contains an error, and people just misinterpret exactly what μετα τρεις ημερας means because they know neither Greek, nor understand Hebraisms.

The Greek doesn't contain "too many errors", and there's no evidence that Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were written in a language other than Greek.

There also weren't 2 Sabbaths in the text either: the thread linked to answers these such questions, with evidence given to justify the statements contained therein :)
TWTY website and forum Administrator.

Please respect everyone, and try to not get too heated when discussing one's point of view :)

Hephzibah
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:50 am

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Hephzibah » Sat Nov 09, 2013 9:09 pm

I was referencing the Greek text altogether, not an individual verse. Are you saying that Mark 31st not say that?

Edit:
Swalchy,

I am confused by your comment, and do not know what you think contradicts my point of view.

You seem to imply that you are more knowledgeable in Greek, and Hebrew thinking than everyone else. This would not be a good assumption. If you believe so strongly that you have it right, and you know better, your pride will keep you from Ya's revelation and light. There is always more to learn, and we should be willing to keep an open mind and always look at all sides.

The thematic connection of three days runs the length of the scriptures. I know you think the Talmud couldn't teach you anything, but you might be wrong. The Sages before Messiahs time believed that every story was of Messiah. They believed in two Messiahs, Ben Yoseph, and Ben Dawid. It wasn't until later that they began teaching Israel was the suffering servant.

User avatar
Swalchy
Site Admin
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Swalchy » Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:17 am

I was referencing the Greek text altogether, not an individual verse. Are you saying that Mark 31st not say that?
Again, see the thread where this is explained in detail. In several places it says "after three days" (Matt 27:63; Mark 8:31, 9:31, 10:34); in others it says "on the third day" (Matt 16:21, 17:23, 20:19; Luke 9:22, 18:33, 24:7, 46; Acts 10:40; 1 Cor 15:4).

Mark is the only author to constantly use the phrase μετα τρεις ημερας: Matthew only puts this phrase on the lips of the Pharisees, and Luke never uses it. Both Matt and Luke prefer τη τριτη ημερα/τη ημερα τη τριτη, and Matthew states that the Pharisees asked Pilate to have guards at the tomb only "until the third day/εως της τριτης ημερας", which would be pointless if three full days and nights were in view with regards to the phrase μετα τρεις ημερας.

Mark only uses this in the full phrase και αποκτανθεις/αποκτανθηναι, και μετα τρεις ημερας αναστησεται/αναστηναι (αποκτανθεις/αποκτανθηναι being from the root αποκτεινω; and αναστησεται/αναστηναι being from the root ανιστημι), indicating that this was a clause that was peculiar to Mark himself, and as mentioned in the other thread, only appears when being handed over to the chief priests is in view.
I am confused by your comment, and do not know what you think contradicts my point of view.
Well, you've stated several things in this topic already: "the scriptures state that the women rested the Sabbath, and then bought spices, and then rested according to the commandment"; "It was a literal 72 hours"; "Yeshua stated that there were 12 hours in a day"; "He would be in the grave 3 days AND 3 NIGHTS"; "Mark 9:31, he would be killed and then after that he was killed he would rise the third day", all of which are based on readings found in the Greek text of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Then after I pointed out that all four of these accounts agree that the Messiah died on παρασκευη, which is Greek for Friday, you state that "the Greek has too many errors to be the original".

Do you not see the irrationality, illogic, and contradiction in your own words? If the Greek "has too many" errors in it, how can you appeal to certain sections that fuel your belief? If the Greek text "has too many errors" in it, then you can't appeal to anything written in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John as a basis for your belief, or else you'd be basing your beliefs on something that is erroneous.

Either the Greek "has too many errors" in it, so you can't point to anything in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John to state anything, or the Greek is the sole basis for our understand of what happened to the Messiah, who was crucified on παρασκευη/Friday, and then rose on τη μια των σαββατων/Day one of Sabbaths/Sunday.
You seem to imply that you are more knowledgeable in Greek, and Hebrew thinking than everyone else.
I neither stated nor implied such a thing. I'll quote my words again: Or perhaps (in this case, definitely), neither section contains an error, and people just misinterpret exactly what μετα τρεις ημερας means because they know neither Greek, nor understand Hebraisms.

What this means is that people who don't understand Greek or Hebraisms misinterpret what μετα τρεις ημερας means - those that do understand Greek and Hebraisms, don't believe that the Messiah was dead for three days and three nights.

I know of no commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, done by someone who knows the Greek text and the Hebraisms contained within, that states that the Messiah was dead for three full days and three full nights:
I do however know of many people, who don't understand Greek or Hebraisms, that do state such a ridiculous thing, and try to argue that the Messiah was crucified on a day other than Friday, and that three full days and three full nights have to pass.

This isn't me stating nor implying that I personally know "more Greek and Hebrew thinking" than everyone else: what I've stated here, in this thread, is known the world over by many different people, and written about by many scholars with far more intelligence than I have.

In my experience (and evidenced in the several threads on TWTY), misinterpretations and mistakes are usually done by those who don't read the Hebrew or Greek from which they're basing their statements and beliefs, and instead rely on English translations (or just regurgitate what other people have said), which they really shouldn't.
This would not be a good assumption. If you believe so strongly that you have it right, and you know better, your pride will keep you from Ya's revelation and light. There is always more to learn, and we should be willing to keep an open mind and always look at all sides.
I know there's always more to learn, but until someone actually points out where something is wrong, I've not yet had anything brought forward that contradicts what I understand regarding the crucifixion and resurrection. Until that's done so, I have no reason to think that I'm wrong; in the same way that I don't have any reason to think that 2+2 doesn't = 4.

There's not been anything mentioned in this thread that is new, including my answers given.
The thematic connection of three days runs the length of the scriptures. I know you think the Talmud couldn't teach you anything, but you might be wrong. The Sages before Messiahs time believed that every story was of Messiah. They believed in two Messiahs, Ben Yoseph, and Ben Dawid. It wasn't until later that they began teaching Israel was the suffering servant.
I don't recall arguing anything against the "three days" - I only argued that the Messiah wasn't "dead" for three days and three nights, and that He was crucified on a Friday, and not any other day.

Also, I never said that the Talmud "couldn't teach [me] anything" :)
TWTY website and forum Administrator.

Please respect everyone, and try to not get too heated when discussing one's point of view :)

Hephzibah
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:50 am

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Hephzibah » Mon Nov 11, 2013 4:08 am

I spent 2 hours writing a very thorough reply this morning, and accidentally erased it by hitting the back button on my phone. So I will keep this short.


"Do you not see the irrationality, illogic, and contradiction in your own words? If the Greek "has too many" errors in it, how can you appeal to certain sections that fuel your belief? If the Greek text "has too many errors" in it, then you can't appeal to anything written in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John as a basis for your belief, or else you'd be basing your beliefs on something that is erroneous"

It seems as though you are not even reading what i have written. I don't appeal to certain sections of the Greek, i use the Aramaic. There is plenty of evidence to prove that the second witness was penned in Aramaic, but that is another topic. From reading the link you provided, it seems that you translated and when it didn't suit your argument, you stated that it needed to be changed here or there. If you don't understand "the third day" and "after three days" it is because you don't understand the Hebraic thought of that time.

As for Matthew 27, if you read it in context (even in the Greek) it is not hard to see what they where saying. The Aramaic does not say ”until the third day ” but ”for three days”. That aside, let's look at a Greek version.

“Sir, we remember how that impostor said, while he was still alive, ‘After three days I will rise.’ 64 Therefore order the tomb to be made secure until the third day".

This took place the next day, and they clearly stated that Messiah was to rise ”after three days". So it would make sense that they meant until the end of that day, and not the end of the day before. Now when it suits you, you would point to inclusive reckoning, and say it could be all or part of the the days, but here this doesn't seem to apply. Are you sure I am the one who is appealing to certain sections that fuel my beliefs?

Also, you did say "I have read parts of the Talmud, but didn't feel the need to waste my time reading much more of it." which seems to imply that it would not teach you anything.

User avatar
Swalchy
Site Admin
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Swalchy » Mon Nov 11, 2013 11:50 am

I spent 2 hours writing a very thorough reply this morning, and accidentally erased it by hitting the back button on my phone. So I will keep this short.
I hate when that happens too :)
"Do you not see the irrationality, illogic, and contradiction in your own words? If the Greek "has too many" errors in it, how can you appeal to certain sections that fuel your belief? If the Greek text "has too many errors" in it, then you can't appeal to anything written in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John as a basis for your belief, or else you'd be basing your beliefs on something that is erroneous"

It seems as though you are not even reading what i have written. I don't appeal to certain sections of the Greek, i use the Aramaic.
I do apologise. However, as this is the first time you've even mentioned the Aramaic, I was hardly in a position to know that you were appealing to it as evidence for what you state :)
There is plenty of evidence to prove that the second witness was penned in Aramaic, but that is another topic.
It certain is another topic, especially as this statement is false. Not to mention that the oldest known Aramaic Peshitta texts derive from the 5th Century CE, when the oldest Greek stems from the end of the 2nd Century CE (Papyrus 45).
From reading the link you provided, it seems that you translated and when it didn't suit your argument, you stated that it needed to be changed here or there.
Actually, as the translation on TWTY isn't perfect, I am constantly noticing places where the translation is off, and amend accordingly. I gave a reason for the emendations - if you can point out where I've lied in order to "suit my argument", feel free to do so.
If you don't understand "the third day" and "after three days" it is because you don't understand the Hebraic thought of that time.
Allow me to quote from R.T France and his commentary on Mark, pp 336:
The other distinctive feature of Mark’s wording is the phrase μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας, which he uses in all three passion predictions, whereas Matthew and Luke consistently use τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. (In Mt. 27:63–64, however, the Jewish authorities appeal for the tomb to be guarded ἕως τῆς τρίτης ἡμέρας on the basis that Jesus had predicted his resurrection μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας, a surprising survival of the Marcan formula.) Mark’s phrase reflects Jewish usage, whereby ‘after three days’ would mean ‘the day after tomorrow’, but in a broader cultural context this idiom might not be understood, resulting in the embarrassment of a discrepancy between prediction and fact, in that all the gospels agree on a period of only some thirty-six hours between Jesus’ burial and resurrection. The phrase used by Matthew and Luke is therefore apologetically safer, even if in a Jewish context its meaning was not significantly different. (France, R. T. (2002). The Gospel of Mark : A commentary on the Greek text / Underlying mine).

Hebraic thought of the time didn't notice a difference between μετα τριες ημερας or τη τριτη ημερα - however us, as English speakers, have different connotations of what "after" and "on" indicate, and so get confused when we see the language used in Mark, and think that "after three days" must mean three full days. It doesn't, and no one at the time thought this either.
As for Matthew 27, if you read it in context (even in the Greek) it is not hard to see what they where saying. The Aramaic does not say ”until the third day ” but ”for three days”.
I really don't care what a version from the 5th Century CE has to say.

However, I did go and check the the Aramaic-English interlinear on http://www.peshitta.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, just to make sure that the Aramaic of Mark 8:31 coincided with the Greek, and would say "after". But what did I find?

Image
As you can see, the translation given over at peshitta.org has the Aramaic saying "on the third day", not "after three days". I also checked Mark 9:31 and Mark 10:34 - all three say "on the third day".

So I checked Matthew 27:64 as well:
Image
Again, having "until the third day" not "for three days" like you claim.

Seems to me that if the Aramaic is the original (and the Greek is a translation), then the Greek μετα τριες ημερας and τη τριτη ημερα are indeed synonymous, and the Aramaic has "on the third day" consistently throughout Mark.

If it's vice-versa (as I would argue), then the Aramaic translators understood μετα τριες ημερας as meaning "on the third day".
That aside, let's look at a Greek version.

“Sir, we remember how that impostor said, while he was still alive, ‘After three days I will rise.’ 64 Therefore order the tomb to be made secure until the third day".

This took place the next day, and they clearly stated that Messiah was to rise ”after three days". So it would make sense that they meant until the end of that day, and not the end of the day before. Now when it suits you, you would point to inclusive reckoning, and say it could be all or part of the the days, but here this doesn't seem to apply. Are you sure I am the one who is appealing to certain sections that fuel my beliefs?
See above on the comment regarding "after three days" and "on three days", and also on your appeal to the Aramaic (which, from what I can see, actually proves my point rather than contradicts it).
Also, you did say "I have read parts of the Talmud, but didn't feel the need to waste my time reading much more of it." which seems to imply that it would not teach you anything.
No, all that states is that it would be a waste of my time, because I had better stuff to be either doing or reading. If I'd added "because I didn't learn anything from it", then you might have a point.

Please, don't read things into what I say and just take them at straight value. If you think I imply something, don't presume - ask me to clarify. I'm sure the Talmud could teach me lots of things, but as it's not pertinent to anything that I'm doing, reading much more of it would indeed be "a waste of my time".
TWTY website and forum Administrator.

Please respect everyone, and try to not get too heated when discussing one's point of view :)

Hephzibah
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:50 am

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Hephzibah » Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:22 pm

I am sorry for the confusion as well, I had stated earlier that "I was referring to the Greek text as a whole" , and assumed that you would have recognized by that statement, that I do not read the Greek, but the Aramaic.

Honestly, I was very excited to discuss the scriptures until you said "I like how people can appeal to one section of text (in your case here, Mark 9:31), and then when another section of text contradicts their belief, that section then "has too many errors" in it: how do you know it's not the part that you appeal to that contains the error?” and then my guard went up, and I was less than kind with my response. This is obviously my fault, and I apologize. I don't want to have a fiery debate with unkind words, I would prefer to give everyone the benefit of the doubt.

Apparently you are misunderstanding my point on the text, and I am misunderstanding yours. So if you would explain your position, maybe we can reach a conclusion together.

The Peshitta is a Byzantine type, or received text, and not a critical text. The quote that I provided came from Lamsa, and can also be found in the Etheridge translation. I am texting on a phone, because my computer crashed, so I am limited in what I can do really. I prefer the western type text, like the old Syriac.

I have no issue understanding "third day", "after three days", or "until the third day".

I do not automatically side with the majority, in fact they usually just seem brain washed into believing the school of thought they were instructed to believe. Who can blame them. Just because they are many, does not make them right.

Also, whatever text we have the most of, does not make it the correct one. Neither does the oldest shred, make it the first or most accurate.

User avatar
Swalchy
Site Admin
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Swalchy » Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:57 pm

Hi Heph (sorry for the latish reply - work beconed!),

I too must apologise for my unpleasant tone (due to my guard being up as well). I've argued over when and for how long the Messiah was crucified/was dead to death (excuse the pun), so annoyance and stupidity took over what should just be another discussion on the topic.

I don't exactly know what I could say that I haven't already said, so I'll just put it all down in bullet points, giving direct statements that can be talked about :)
  • The Messiah was crucified on a Friday, the day before the seventh-day Sabbath (Matt 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:14, 31, 42).
  • The Messiah was dead for Friday night, Saturday day, Saturday night, and rose sometime Sunday day (Matt 28:1; Mark 16:1; Luke 24:1; John 20:1).
  • The fact that the Messiah was resurrected on a Sunday wasn't because there was anything significant about Sunday, but because the day that He rose was the Feast of Firstfruits, which was also the first day of the 49 days that led up to the feast of Pentecost/weeks/seven Sabbaths, hence why it was known as τη μια των σαββατων/μιαν σαββατων/"One of Sabbaths."
  • When the Messiah said that He would be "in the heart of the earth" for three days and three nights (Matt 12:40), people misunderstand this as Him stating that He would be dead/in the grave for this amount of time.
  • The phrase "the heart of the earth" translates the Greek τη καρδια της γης, with the word "earth" being a mistranslation of the Greek γη/ge, which first and foremost means "land", "area", or "region", used mainly in the phrase "the land of Yisra'el."
  • So the phrase should actually be translated "in the heart of the land", the land being "Yisra'el", and heart meaning the "centre" of Yisra'el, aka, Yarushalaiym (Jerusalem).
  • This was fulfiled in that the Messiah only stayed for three days and nights in Yarushalaiym consecutively from just before the "last supper" (Matt 26:17; Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7) to His resurrection (Matt 28:1; Mark 16:1; Luke 24:1; John 20:1), which would encompass Thursday night, Friday day, Friday night, Saturday day, Saturday night, Sunday day.
  • The use of "after three days" in Mark 8:31; 9:31 and 10:34 is synonymous with Matthew and Luke's usage of "on the third day", with both being used to indicate the same passage of time, never with three full days and nights in view.
  • This is further evidenced by the fact that Mark 8:31 is repeated in Matthew 16:21 and Luke 9:22, but in Matt 16:21/Luke 9:22 the use is "on the third day" compared with Mark's "after three days".
  • Then further evidence of this is that Mark 9:31 is repeated in Matthew 17:23, again with the phrase "on the third day".
  • Then even further evidence of this is that Mark 10:34 is repeated in Matthew 20:19 and Luke 18:33, once more with the phrase "on the third day".
  • When they ask for the guards to be at the tomb (Matt 27:62-66), they did actually mean just "until the third day", the "third day" being the one following their request.
...and that's about it :)
TWTY website and forum Administrator.

Please respect everyone, and try to not get too heated when discussing one's point of view :)

Hephzibah
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:50 am

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Hephzibah » Thu Nov 14, 2013 9:20 am

I have been on this site several times now to reply, but things just keep popping up! Sorry for My delayed response Swalchy! :D

It is almost midnight here so I am going to have to be brief, but I will post again tomorrow night.

I can see that we are not going to agree with each other, no matter what, for the simple fact that I do not believe in the Greek as the original. But I still have some questions as to why you believe what you do.

When Yeshua gave the sign of Jonah, it seems to me that the parallel he was making fits better with the grave then with a time where he would be in the city. Yeshua had been to the city many times. There are not really any similarities to Jerusalem and the belly of a whale. There are however, strong connections to the grave. Especially considering that he stated on several occasions that he would be dead three days.

I understand the idea behind inclusive reckoning, and why this seems to be a huge hang up for people, but if you take a close look at each example you will see there are no contradictions.
Yeshua said 3 days, third day, and after three days. He also said three days, and three nights. In the creation account we see that a day is made up of two parts, the evening and the morning. So one day is night and day. But at the same time, Ya knew how man had begun to reckon time, and so he clarified that 12 hours were in the day, and he would be dead 3 days and nights equaling 72 hours. Because he was laid in the grave at twilight, night came before day, and so three days or on the third day would both be three nights as well. The same goes for Esther, night came first, so it was: night day, night day, night and on the third day she went before the king. Further more, the Jews reckoned twilight as the last hour of one day, and the first hour of the next day, so after three days shows the precise timing from twilight to twilight.

If you take a close look at the resurrection account, Mary arrived at tomb just as the Sabbath was ending and it began to dawn towards the first day of the week. Dawn tends to make us think of the rising sun, but Jews called the rising moon dawn, as well as the sun.

In accordance with Shavout and the wave sheaf Yeshua was released from the grave at twilight when the people were cutting their barley. The barley was always cut (representing Yeshua being loosed from the grave) at twilight because it had to be processed that night and ready to be offered in the morning. That is why when Mary went to the tomb, the angel told her he was gone, and the next morning she saw him and tried to grab his feet, but he said he had not ascended yet. Then at the precise time the Levites were waving the offering to be accepted, a Messiah was going up to the Father. His sacrifice was accepted and then he came back down and revealed the scriptures to them.

That was long, I'll get to the questions tomorrow. I hope you are well, shalom swalchy! :D

Edit:
Good morning!

According to Torah the lamb is supposed to be brought to your home on the 10th day and kept until the 14th. This was to observe the lamb, and make sure it was with out spot or blemish. Just like the time of the great deliverance, here we see a mirror effect. They selected the lamb on Shabbat Hagadol, and Yeshua made his Triumphal entry on that day. Then from the 10th to the 14th he was in Jerusalem teaching, and showing himself to be without spot and blemish. If you trace the time-line backwards in the Torah you can see that the passover lamb was sacrificed on a Wednesday in the midst of the week, and the left Egypt on Thursday. This is also what the Talmud records.

I'll be back in a few :)

User avatar
Swalchy
Site Admin
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Swalchy » Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:23 pm

Hi Heph,

Whilst we certainly won’t agree between whether the Aramaic or the Greek is the original, from what I can see, there isn’t much discrepancy between the two when it comes to the Messiah’s last days.
When Yeshua gave the sign of Jonah, it seems to me that the parallel he was making fits better with the grave then with a time where he would be in the city. Yeshua had been to the city many times. There are not really any similarities to Jerusalem and the belly of a whale. There are however, strong connections to the grave. Especially considering that he stated on several occasions that he would be dead three days.
Problem with this is that Jonah wasn’t dead when he was inside the belly of the “great fish”, and no one actually witnessed him being inside the great fish either, so how exactly it constitutes as a “sign” is a bit of a mystery (However Luke does give a bit of an interpretation in Luke 11:30, when Jonah was the “sign” to the people of Ninevah, so shall the Messiah Himself be a sign to “this generation”).

Plus, there is no contemporary literature that can be brought forth to show that “in the heart of the land/earth” is equal to being dead.

Also, whilst the Messiah had been to Yarushalaiym many times, there is no evidence that He ever spent three consecutive days there apart from just prior to His crucifixion, and to after His resurrection.

Furthermore, the Messiah never states anywhere that He “would be dead three days”. The only use of “three days” in the eyewitness accounts appear in Matthew 12:40 (x2, one being a direct quote from the book of Jonah); Matthew 15:32 (when the crowd had been with the Messiah “three days”); Matthew 26:61 & 27:40 (with reference to being rebuilt “within three days” (not “after three days”)); Matthew 27:63; Mark 8:2 (a repeat of Matt 15:32); Mark 8:31, 9:31 & 10:34; Mark 14:58 & 15:29 (a repeat of Matt 26:61 & 27:40); Luke 2:46 (the Messiah’s visit to the temple when He was twelve); John 2:19 & 20 (the first, and only time when the Messiah stated concerning the rebuilding of the “temple” in three days (again, not “after three days”).

Not a single one of these places has the Messiah stating that He would be dead for three days’ time – there’s quite a few that have Him “raising the temple” within three days, and many more places where the Messiah states that He shall be raised “on the third day”.
Yeshua said 3 days, third day, and after three days. He also said three days, and three nights.
Since you mentioned the Old Syriac/Aramaic of Lamsa and Etheridge, I did a bit of checking.

There are only four places that have the phrase “after three days” in the Greek: Matthew 27:63, and the three occurrences in Mark (8:31, 9:31 & 10:34). I provide the following from the Lamsa translation (courtesy of Lamsa Bible Online), as well as the Etheridge translation (courtesy of http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicN ... eridge.htm) of the Aramaic texts that we have:

Matt 27:63
Lamsa: And they said to him, Our lord, we have just remembered that that deceiver used to say when he was alive, After three days I will rise again.
Etheridge: saying to him, Our lord, we remember that that impostor said while alive, That after three days I will arise.

Mark 8:31
Lamsa: Then he began to teach them that the Son of man would have to suffer a great deal and be rejected by the elders and the high priests and the scribes, and be killed, and rise again on the third day.
Etheridge: And he began to teach them, that it was to be that the Son of man should suffer much, and be rejected by the elders, and by the chief priests, and by the Sophree, and be killed, and that the third day he should arise!

Mark 9:31
Lamsa: For he taught his disciples, and said to them, The Son of man will be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him; and after he is killed, he will rise on the third day.
Etheridge: And he taught his disciples, and told them, That the Son of man would be delivered into the hands of men, and they would kill him; and that when he was slain, on the third day he should arise.

Mark 10:34
Lamsa: And they will mock him and scourge him and spit in his face and kill him; and on the third day he will rise up.
Etheridge: and shall mock him, and scourge him, and spit in his face, and kill him: and the third day he shall arise.

Bar Matt 27:63, according to the Lamsa and Etheridge, the Old Syriac/Aramaic never has the Messiah saying “after three days”, it is always “on the third day” or “the third day”. The Peshitta.org translation also testifies to this as well.

So I know you say that you don’t read the Greek – but the three translations of the Aramaic don’t say “after three days”, contrary to what you’ve claimed.

I think we should sort out this first before I talk about any of the other things you’ve said, Heph.

Now I know it must be damn hard trying to do all this via your phone, but several of the other things you’ve said you haven’t provided any references for, which I think would be very helpful especially when checking what you’ve said (I already have some misgivings about the statement “Mary arrived at tomb just as the Sabbath was ending”, so I need to know exactly what you’re referencing with that, as everywhere I’ve checked has the Sabbath already ended, not “ending”) :)
TWTY website and forum Administrator.

Please respect everyone, and try to not get too heated when discussing one's point of view :)

Hephzibah
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:50 am

Re: When was Yahushua crucified Part 2

Postby Hephzibah » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:13 am

You are right Swalch. When conversing with others about the sacred scriptures, I will usually try to explain things with the Greek text, because it is simpler that way.

It would take a considerable amount of time to study each text, and come to an accurate conclusion, free of presupposed ideas and opinions of others, on which text is the original. Frankly, most people are not going to give it the thought that it requires, and really wouldn't need to in there understanding of Scripture. So generally, I like to keep it simple. Now if we were going to discuss something as important as Messiah's genealogy, I would introduce the aramaic because it would be completely necessary. I don't know if you understand what I mean, but a lot of people go to church every Sunday, and never see a conflict in what they believe, so why ask questions.

Either way, each reckoning of time is completely accurate given the circumstances, no matter the text. It was a literal 72 hours.

I will explain the twilight resurrection tomorrow night, it is just crazy busy here these days! :)


Return to “Renewed Covenant”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron