Originally posted by Netchicken
Mik, you are pushing an empty barrow.

Firstly the exact date that the cricifiction happened doesn't matter.

I don't think you realize what this is all about. 3/4 of the Roman Catholic gospel is proven false here. Time and Church doesn't match. What I'm trying to say, is that the Roman Catholic Church isn't the way to salvation. Not on conditions. To believe in Jesus isn't to be good at quoting, but to love the Truth, the Way and Life. RC Babylon is a slow and painfull death, a straight and wide road for the rich to damnation, and there's no truth in her, only seductive vain. She's making daily love to an image of Satan. To love everyone is to love God. To love the few controlled is to love perdition. Open your eyes. It's obvious!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't believe in lies just because the most powerful systemized pride tells me to. And you shouldn't either. Read the >Book of books as a book, not as a lie.

*going to bed now* Make some efforts, clean your mind, pray and ask for guidance from MY King, who was called Jesus of Nazareth, he will guide you personally, but it'll take the rest of your life, and you'll live as a fugitive because of it. Join us. We are the fugitives from Babylon. There is no rest for us until our King is recognized.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Mik I must agree with Netchicken, you cant dispense with the accounts of the synoptic gospels, when there are three that collaborate, for one which differs. Basic Ockham's razor stuff really.

Each year many observe "Good Friday", the day they believe that Jesus was crucified. Then "Easter" Sunday will be observed as the day Christ arose from the dead. But was Jesus truly crucified on a Friday and resurrected on a Sunday Morning? And does it really matter?

If you believe in Jesus as the Messiah, then it does matter, because the only sign which would be given to prove that He was the promised Messiah is the sign of Jonah.

When the Jewish religious leaders asked Jesus for a sign to prove that He was sent from God, Jesus answered :
"An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet NO SIGN shall be given to it BUT THE SIGN OF JONAH the prophet. For just as Jonah was THREE DAYS and THREE NIGHTS in the belly of the sea monster, so shall the Son of man be THREE DAYS and THREE NIGHTS in the heart of the earth."
(Matthew 12:39-40)

Jesus said, not only three DAYS but also three NIGHTS.

That is 72 hours in the grave.

Many erroneously assume that because Jesus was crucified on the "day of preparation" that He was killed on "Friday", the weekly preparation day.

"And behold, a man named Joseph, who was a member of the Council, a good and righteous man, a man from Arimathea, a city of the Jews, who was waiting for the kingdom of God; this man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. And he took it down and wrapped it in a linen cloth, and laid Him in a tomb cut into the rock, where no one had ever lain. And it was the PREPARATION DAY, and the SABBATH WAS ABOUT TO BEGIN. Now the women who had come with Him out of Galilee followed after, and saw the tomb and how His body was laid. And they returned and prepared spices and perfumes. And on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment."
(Luke 23:50-56)

We can read the same account in the other gospels as well, so it is very clear that Jesus was killed and buried on the day of preparation. But how can we get THREE DAYS and THREE NIGHTS from near sundown Friday to Sunday morning? Friday NIGHT would be ONE NIGHT, Saturday would be ONE DAY. Saturday NIGHT would be TWO NIGHTS and Sunday morning could not even be counted as a DAY. This reckoning would give us only ONE DAY and TWO NIGHTS, not the THREE DAYS and THREE NIGHTS Jesus gave as His only sign.

Jesus certainly made no mistake......... so what is the answer to this puzzle?

thanks for the answer!

Originally posted by Maddas
Mik I must agree with Netchicken, you cant dispense with the accounts of the synoptic gospels, when there are three that collaborate, for one which differs. Basic Ockham's razor stuff really.

Sorry it took so long. I've been off the net since Monday because of a power failure knocked out my modem...

It's not 3 against one. It's one bad against one good. There is no doubt among scholars that the three synoptic gospels are all based uppon the same sources and is to be concidered second, even third hand writings written within a tradition of vivid storytelling, the more action, the greater audience. The writer of the Gospel of John however claims to be a first hand witness to the events written about. It is written by one of Jesus' disciples, perhaps even his brother-in-law. Where the synptic gospels are sensational, the gospel of John is nuctern and straight. Why trust second and third hand sensationalist writings when you have an eye witness?

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Originally posted by VzH
Jesus certainly made no mistake......... so what is the answer to this puzzle?

I guess the answer is that you are better in explaining things that me. I'm quite certain that Jesus was killed on Erev Pesach, Wednesday year 30 AD, because this is the only time Jesus could have fulfilled the Jonah prophecy and his own words concerning it. Thanx mate!

Blessings,
Mikromarius

In the current light of the thread Astronomers pinpoint the death of Jesus, I may have to withdraw my apolgy concerning Jesus's death. The date they put forward, 3 p.m. Friday, April 3, 33 A.D. for Jesus death and 4 am Sunday, April 5 th for the day he rose , seems to coroleate with that of general church reckoning.

If true then we are back to square of, How did Jesus fulfill the prophesy of Jonah.

My apolygy still stands and I belive the year that Jesus did die was 30 A.D.

And as VhZ put the Question. 3 days and 3 nights was Jesus dead, before he rose. He would not have made any mistakes.

The second likely date was Friday april 7 30 A.D was dismissed because a eclispe did not occur that year in Jerusalem.

What has got me buffed though is how you make the date 3rd of April to be a wednesday and the astonomers make it a friday.

That aside I have enjoy this thread, since it has challange a belief that I took for granted.

Good one Mikromarius







[Edited on 10-5-2003 by Maddas]

The problem is attaching a literal interpretation to "three days and three nights" rather than an idiomatic interpretation which is probably the case. Remember Jesus was nailed through His hands. Well if someone were to nailed to a cross though the actual hands, the body would rip away from the beams. The Romans actually drove the nails through the wrists where the bones are stong enough to support the body.
Well in the Jewish idioms, the word "hand" also included what we call the wrists.

Yes, and Jesus was probably not evan nail to a cross but in fact a stump of a tree...............

I beat Mirkro believes this to ......He belives that Jesus is not god and is in fact the king of Heaven......Somewhat within the beliefs that Jehova witnesses believe.

But what that got to do with the death of Jesus.

The point is that people get hung up on the term "three days and three nights" attempting to attach a literal interpretation to the term when perhaps an idiomatic interpretation should be used.

I do see your point Jag, thanks.

Originally posted by Maddas
Yes, and Jesus was probably not evan nail to a cross but in fact a stump of a tree...............

I beat Mirkro believes this to ......He belives that Jesus is not god and is in fact the king of Heaven......Somewhat within the beliefs that Jehova witnesses believe.

But what that got to do with the death of Jesus.

I believe Jesus was killed on a cross that was the common way of execution with the Romans at the time, and no, I'm not JW. JW is a bizarre way of believing. They're calling themselves Jews though they are not.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Crucifixion was normally reserved by the Romans for what they considered the most horrendous of crimes. E. g., when a slave rebelled (Spaticus), when a Roman Soldier is killed (Barrabas). It was considered so bad that a Roman citizen could not be crucified. The law was so written that not even Ceaser could order the crucifixion of a Roman citizen. (Which was why Paul was beheaded. He was a Roman citizen.)

Originally posted by jagdflieger
The point is that people get hung up on the term "three days and three nights" attempting to attach a literal interpretation to the term when perhaps an idiomatic interpretation should be used.

Jesus has to having been born sometime before year 4 BC, because Herod the Great ruled Palestine between year 37 BC and year 4 BC. Jesus was probably born sometime between year 7 BC and 6 BC when there was a great sign in the Heavens, a major triple conjunction between Jupiter and Saturn within the constallation of Pisces that lasted for about nine months, a sign that would indicate for the wise men in Babylon that a great king was to be born and later executed. I'll post a separate thread about this later on. And as I've shown, Jesus couldn't have been killed the year they claim. This indicates that the Catholic Church isn't to be taken seriously in the matter of dating the events discribed in the Gospel.

Blessings,
Mikromarius