Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Good Wednesday or Good Friday?
#16
According to the tradition laid out in the "book of the bee" written by Metropolitan Shlemon of the Church of the East in 13th century, "Our Lord was crucified at the third hour of Friday, the 9th of Nisan."

I don't know if this helps, but I thought I would post this regardless.

God Bless,

Nimrod Warda
Reply
#17
I think that's because it says Friday in the Gospel of Mark. Mark wasn't aware there were 2 Sabbaths.
Luke points out there were 2 Sabbaths. But Luke didn't show the difference between 2 Sabbaths. But Gospel of John points out that first Sabbath was a High Sabbath. And this helped to differentiate the First Sabbath and Second Sabbath.
Reply
#18
Mark wasn't aware? Are you really willing to throw out an inspired writer who received instruction from Shimon Kefa himself just to promote your wednesday theory? Mark is the only writer who gives us a day by day chronolgy of that week.
Reply
#19
"Mark wasn't aware? Are you really willing to throw out an inspired writer who received instruction from Shimon Kefa himself just to promote your wednesday theory? Mark is the only writer who gives us a day by day chronology of that week."

I am not throwing out the Gospel of Mark. Its a Great Gospel. But I am just pointing out that sometimes minor confusions happen.

Let me explain. Its true that Mark wrote the Gospel with the help of Shimon Kefa. But not the entire Gospel. Let me take an incident from the week of Crucifixion as an example. Let me take Mark Chapter 14:47 (King James Version). Mark Chapter 14:47 says "And one of them that stood by drew a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear."

In the Gospel of John 18:10, we read this "Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus."

Mark's Gospel never says who cut off the ear of high priest's ear? But John's Gospel clearly explains this - It was Shimon Kefa who cut off the "right" ear of high priest's servant. John also points out that it was the right ear. And the servant's name was Malchus. And Mark's Gospel doesn't say which ear? And Mark's Gospel doesn't say the name of the servant either.

If Shimon Kefa helped Mark to write the "entire Gospel", then Shimon Kefa would have clearly explained about this incident to Mark.

Luke's Gospel points out there were 2 Sabbaths after Jesus Christ died on the cross. John's Gospel points out the importance of the First Sabbath. This minor confusion in Mark's Gospel was cleared by Luke and John. Sometimes these small confusions happen. But these small confusions are cleared by other Gospels.

Let me show another example.

Let me take NIV this time. Matthew Chapter 27:42 to 44 (NIV) says "He saved others,? they said, ?but he can?t save himself! He?s the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. 43 He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, ?I am the Son of God.?? In the same way the robbers who were crucified with him also heaped insults on him."

In Matthew's Gospel, we see "robbers." Not one robber.

But Luke clears this confusion. Take Luke Chapter 23: 39 - 43 "One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: ?Aren?t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!? But the other criminal rebuked him. ?Don?t you fear God,? he said, ?since you are under the same sentence? We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.? Then he said, ?Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." Jesus answered him, ?I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.?
Reply
#20
Thanks for the clarification konway. Now I understand what you meant. Sorry I took it the wrong way.
Reply
#21
"Thanks for the clarification konway. Now I understand what you meant. Sorry I took it the wrong way."

Don't worry about taking it the wrong way. And You are always welcome to ask questions.
Reply
#22
ograabe Wrote:This is not a new idea. It was promoted about 50 years ago by Herbert W. Armstrong and his "Worldwide Church of God". His son, Garner Ted Armstrong had a weekly radio program promoting their new prophet theology.

Otto
Cheers, dear ograabe.

You are correct that this is not a "new" idea. I'm so glad more people are becoming aware. Many people are still laboring under false and ignorant impressions concerning the "Wednesday" crucifixion. I would love to help clean this up. About that...

I certainly agree that the men you reference were among those who believed in & taught the "Wednesday" crucifixion, although I'm unsure how you really mean the rest of your post. The "idea" is found beyond their writings, and far further back than 50 years... Besides some older Millerite groups and the Indian connection konway87 mentions, according to some interpretations, the "idea" is first recorded in the Scriptures themselves.

Since these Armstrongs you reference certainly believed in & taught many un-scriptural things, they seem to be a source for unsound teaching. Presenting the "Wednesday" crucifixion as something of their invention might therefore lead those poor souls susceptible to persuasion by logical fallacy to conclude from this that the "idea" must be incorrect. It's just ad hominem, though, to imply that the specific teaching must be wrong because of the person you can associate with the idea - isn't it? Not really compelling. After all, these same people also taught prayer - and that the Messiah is the Son of God!

As evidence that your post may leave some with the impression that the Armstrongs originated the "Wednesday" crucifixion "idea"... see below. Hopefully the misinforming effect of your post was unintended.

Rafa Wrote:Herbie armstrong who came up with this "good wednsesday" be gone.
Dear Rafa, I respectfully disagree with your position here. The Herbert fellow is quite gone, but he is not the originator of the interpretation you seem so set against.

konway87 Wrote:I know its not a new idea. Many People argued about this subject long time ago. For Example, Some people in South India argued that Jesus was crucified on Wednesday. But many others supported Good Friday. I know about this, because I grew up there.
Great points, dear konway87. I'm glad you can bring to the table some perspectives from India. I'd love to learn more. Many of my spiritual brethren have dwelt in India, although fewer since the Portuguese arrived.

=====+=====+=====

For my own part, "...in that very teaching which they mention, I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Torah and in the prophets. I have the same hope in God which they themselves hold, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust. For this reason, I labor to have always a clear conscience before God and before men."

I believe that Yeshua effectively showed through His Earthly ministry that in this world error easily becomes more prevalent than truth. I also see that He found nothing compelling in arguments which essentially boiled down to appeals to "majority" or "tradition". I seek to follow His lead in these things, as in all. Yeshua's attitude there was nothing new, either... God came to Noah not to point him towards the traditions of the majority around him, but rather to teach him how to escape. God came to Abraham neither to instruct him to follow the majority in Ur (or anywhere), nor to follow Ur's traditions; rather quite the opposite - to flee both. No doubt much of what God said seemed to Abraham new and strange. God did not reveal Himself to Israel to support the traditions which surrounded them, nor to praise the majority religious views; rather quite the opposite. No doubt the Torah seemed new and alien. And in a very real sense, it was alien, for like Noah and Abraham their ancestors, they were called to be "different" from those surrounding them. "Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be [what?], for I am [what?]"... The word in question there does not mean to conform ourselves to the world. Quite the opposite; the word we translate "holy" has strong shades of "other" and "separate". Also, we have the instruction, ""You shall not follow a majority in wrongdoing: when you bear witness in a lawsuit, you shall not side with the majority so as to pervert justice." So, in determining what the scriptures say, what to believe, and what to practice, I am not greatly concerned with following a majority or a tradition of men. I am curious to know what those views are, but in determining correctness, they are lent no weight by their "special" majority/tradition status. I find some traditional beliefs or practices useful/beneficial, but some I find useless or even harmful. Some fascinate me, and some provoke severe disinterest. Above all, I want to test all things, then: 1.hold fast to the good and, 2.abstain from every form of evil (i.e., everything not covered by #1).

I've never been a fan of teachings which make the Scripture argue with itself. One thing I take out of "Scripture cannot be broken" is that true teachings bring out the harmony of the scriptures, rather than cherry-pick the lines they can abuse. I have yet to see a support for "Friday" crucifixion that only uses sound hermeneutics & logic, and then only from correct sources & premises... so I have no reason to believe it. Maybe the "Fridayists" are right, but with the arguments as I've heard them, who would know it? Perhaps one day I will see a satisfactory treatment of the "Friday" theory... until then, when weighing the arguments for the day of the crucifixion, I have seen that those in favor of the "Wednesday" event are clearly the superior. Fact, reason and the totality of scripture on a topic are far better supports than "all orthodox churches have always..." or "never mind the rest of the scriptures, this little sliver of Mark can be made to seem to say..."
Reply
#23
It dosent matter at all. I am just glad that it happend.
Reply
#24
I too am beyond glad that it happened, but to me the timing is important because of the way many Jews view the idiom, "three days and three nights" (both in Jonah and from Yeshua's mouth). I have personally met more than a few Jews who cite the traditional Christian timeline as their sole reason Yeshua could not be Messiah. Upon showing them the truth they have converted, glory to God. That makes this an important issue for me. A scripturally unnecessary teaching that is also an impediment to faith for the meticulous or learned, is far from a good thing. This is how I feel about the teaching of a "Friday" crucifixion and a "Sunday" sunrise resurrection.
Reply
#25
Hello rramlow,
St. Mark and St. Luke were never witnesses to miracles of Jesus Christ. So they made few minor confusions. But these minor confusions were corrected by Apostle John and Apostle Matthew. This also applies other way too. There was one minor confusion in Apostle Matthew's Gospel. And this minor confusion was corrected by St. Luke.I love all Four Gospels. But I think Apostle John's Gospel is the strongest out of four, because Apostle John applies more of a personal experience. And I believe Apostle John was one of the few people who saw the second coming of our Lord.

I thought I should post some interesting information about Christianity in Kerala. Unlike Catholics, Many christians in other denominations still use Jewish dietary laws. I am one of them.
Reply
#26
Hello Rafa,
Rafa, I will explain this for you.

St. Mark was under the impression that there was only one Sabbath. So he thought the crucifixion was on a Friday.

But Saint Luke and Saint John point out that there were 2 Sabbaths. I want to point out a mistranslation that was corrected by Paul Younan through his Great Interlinear Translation of Aramaic Peshitta. This mistranslation may have been one of major reasons why Friday became the day of Crucifixion.

(From King James Version)

Luke 24:18 - 21 "One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, "Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?" "What things?" he asked. "About Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place."

In King James Version, we see that "It is the "third day" since all this took place.

(From Paul Younan's Interlinear Translation)

Luke 24:18 - 21 "And one of them answered whose name was Qalyopa, and said to him, "You indeed are only a stranger from Urishlim that you do not know what has happened in it in these days. He said to them, What? They told him about Yeshua, he who was from Nasrath, a man who was a prophet and mighty he was in word and in deed before God and before all of the people. And the chief priests and elders delivered him to a judgement of death and crucified him. And we were hoping that he was about to save Israel. And behold, three days [have passed] since all these things happened."

In Paul Interlinear Translation, it says "And behold, three days have passed since all these things happened."

This conversation happened on a Sunday. "Three days (Thursday, Friday, Saturday) have passed since all these things happened."

St. Luke doesn't point out the importance of First Sabbath. St. John points out that First Sabbath was a High Sabbath. Second Sabbath was a regular Sabbath which is Saturday.

First Sabbath started at Wednesday 6pm which is beginning of Thursday. Jesus Christ was buried right before beginning of High Sabbath. That means Jesus was buried at the end of Wednesday.

Wednesday 6pm to Thursday 6pm - High Sabbath (1 night and 1 day)
Thursday 6pm to Friday 6pm - Women prepared the spices and ointments (Luke 23:56) (1 night and 1 day)
Friday 6pm to Saturday 6pm - Regular Sabbath (1 night and 1 day) They rested Sabbath day according to the commandment. This was after they prepared the spices (Luke 23:56).

Since Jesus Christ was buried at the end of Wednesday, He rose at the end of Saturday. That means right before the beginning of Sunday (Saturday 6pm).

John 6:40 (Murdock Translation) - "For this is the pleasure of my Father, that every one who seeth the Son, and believeth on him, should have life eternal; and I will raise him up at the last day." As you know, Saturday is the seventh and last day of the week. So its possible that Jesus was referring to Saturday.

Rafa, I want to explain more. But the post is getting long. So I am entering into the next subject about the issue of diet. I will start with your view point.

"It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man." - Matthew 15:11

Like you mentioned, the issue of diet isn't considered a fundamental dogma of the faith by any Apostolic Church because of this verse.

Now here is my explanation. Jesus Christ was actually talking to Scribes and Pharisees that Laws are more important than their tradition. The problem was that Scribes and Pharisees favored their tradition over Laws given to them by God. We know that Jesus Christ was a Jew. If Jesus was "actually" saying to Scribes and Pharisees that they could eat unclean food, then Jesus would have been violating Jewish laws. And Scribes and Pharisees would have used this an evidence to destroy Lord Jesus Christ. We know that Pontius Pilate couldn't find a single mistake of Jesus Christ. Not only that, Jesus Christ points out the prophesy by Isaiah as an example in the same chapter (Matthew 15:7-8). This is the same Isaiah the prophet who says this "They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD." This is from Isaiah Chapter 66: 17 (KJV).

Here is the link to Isaiah 66:17 - <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+66%3A17-19&version=KJV">http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... ersion=KJV</a><!-- m -->

Rafa, I want to explain more. But the post is getting too long. if you have any questions, then you can ask me. I will try my best in answering the questions.
Reply
#27
konway87 Wrote:Hello rramlow,
St. Mark and St. Luke were never witnesses to miracles of Jesus Christ. So they made few minor confusions. But these minor confusions were corrected by Apostle John and Apostle Matthew. This also applies other way too. There was one minor confusion in Apostle Matthew's Gospel. And this minor confusion was corrected by St. Luke.I love all Four Gospels. But I think Apostle John's Gospel is the strongest out of four, because Apostle John applies more of a personal experience. And I believe Apostle John was one of the few people who saw the second coming of our Lord.

I thought I should post some interesting information about Christianity in Kerala. Unlike Catholics, Many christians in other denominations still use Jewish dietary laws. I am one of them.

Dear konway87,

Your comments bring me joy. I have long heard we had brethren in Kerala, but did not know to what degree the faith survived the Portuguese. Like you, my people also abstain from unclean foods. Again as you mention, in many ways we are unlike Rome and those she has ..."influenced strongly" to accord with her.

I am fascinated to learn directly from brethren in Kerala, and to find out how many aspects of the primitive faith have survived there after the Jesuits arrived. I want to be sensitive, so it's hard to ask specifics. Suffice to say, I doubt that anything you practice or believe will seem "too jewish" to me. <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

Also, is Kerala where you live now, or only in the past?

Shlama!

Rafa Wrote:rramlow: Despite Calendar differences the Church has deemed the Ressurection was on Sunday and that on Good Friday the Lord passed on from this world. If you disagree with this you might as well throw out the entire Peshitta out the window. Also the issue of diet is not considered a fundamental dogma of the faith by any Apostolic Church including the ACOE :

"It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man."

-Matthew 15:11 (that is in fact the verse the ACOE used to rule on this matter according to a priest I know. note that prelates have many important restrictions though)

rramlow, It is obvious that for 3 days and 3 nights the Son of Man was in the belly of the earth (Matthew 12:40), we are called to respect the plain meaning of scripture.
Dear Rafa,

First, I wish you peace.

Secondly, it's not simple for me to decide the correct responses to the strange attitude coming across in your posts. I will do my best...

RE: "Apostolic Churches", It is easy to claim "Apostolic" authority. You may even have a list of bishops or something, and it's very important to you. If because of that deeply heartfelt loyalty, you are offended at my plain view below, I'm sorry. It's not my intent. It's just that I can't relate to having a loyalty to a tradition of men or an organization of men that defines how I must read the Scriptures. In my background the priorities are exactly the opposite of that, so I don't know how to be sensitive to that way of thinking.

Regardless, it's a pretty well-established principle that a group or "church" of people will change beliefs or practices over time. Generally these changes do not come in the form of improvements; no wonder the actual Apostles warned in Scripture against anyone who might come along preaching the Gospel differently - even themselves.

(WARNING - IRONIC HUMOR) Of course when we read this, it's always an affirmation of our own little religion and a curse on everyone else's. Because after all, everyone knows that what they have is the real original - it's every OTHER group that's strayed! We've never changed! Well... maybe a little... but it's OK! Because we give ourselves...

<!-- s:bigups: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/bigups.gif" alt=":bigups:" title="Big Ups" /><!-- s:bigups: --> APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY. Yeah! We even came up with this special way to read the "keys to the kingdom" passage that makes everything OK! Like, whatever we say goes because after all, we are the "successors to the Apostles"! Woohah!

Except, see, that way of thinking doesn't work with the rest of the Scriptures, but rather against them. It turns the Book into one big argument. So I'm not buying. I don't currently see anything compelling in believing Apostles must have successors. I believe Yehuda had a replacement because he became invalidated before the work for the Twelve was completed. I don't believe Kefa or Yukhanan, etc. needed replacements.

As for the rest of your points, I would love to address them and feel very "up to it", but this is already more than I wanted to post. Suffice to say that I love what you brought up and have much to say, but I see it very differently than how it appears you may.
Reply
#28
Hello rramlow,
I currently live in Florida, U.S. For a while, Christians were forgetting about Peshitta in Kerala. But Thanks to Malayalam translation of Peshitto, they have now a good chance to learn about Peshitta.

In US, One of the things that heavily concerns me is People ignoring dietary laws and worship of images. Let me even take scientifically about an unclean animal - Pig.

In human being, 98% of the body's uric acid is extracted from the blood by the kidneys and removed through urination. With Pigs, it is exactly the opposite. it is important to note that the pig 's biochemistry excretes only 2% of its total uric acid content, the remaining 98% remains as an integral part of the body. I gathered this information from a website long time ago. Another important point is Pigs don't sweat. And we all know that a pig will eat anything.

This information only elevates the importance of dietary laws given by God.

1 John 5:21 (Norton Translation of Peshitta) - "My sons, keep yourselves from the worship of images."

We also read this in Old Testament too. But in many churches, we see people worshipping the images. I hope people will open their eyes one day and realize the truth.
Reply
#29
Dear konway87,

I'm glad some here can relate to my feelings about foods. Even though we know the Kingdom of God is neither food nor drink, still... our Father knows what is good to eat and what is not. Who are we to argue?

In my personal practice, I do not follow traditions of Rabbis for their own sake. Rather, I follow the simple definitions given by YHWH in the Tanakh as to what is and is not food. Things called unclean I regard as not having been created for food. They have some other purpose and so I feel using them for food would violate Father's Way. I imagine that intentionally doing so would amount to rebellion. The thought of using something for food which ought not be eaten, I generally find disgusting. I am usually quite surprised at the different ways people who eat these things will choose to read the Scriptures. They seem to have different rules for reading Scripture than the rules with which I'm familiar, if even only in certain places.

Thanks for your comments - I would love to learn more about your people and your faith.

=====

-=The portion of this message addressing earlier points raised (on the resurrection-schedule topic) has temporarily been voluntarily removed by the author for reconsideration/rephrasing.=-
Reply
#30
Ramlow,

Greetings brother!

I agree on some points you raise and vehemently disagree with others. Could Jesus have been Crucified on a Wednesday, maybe, but there are problems with this hypothesis. St Paul refers to the "Lord's" day, which was the first day of the week. The first day of the week representing new life and completion of the law, including the sabbath.

When Jesus refers to the last day, He is referring to the last day (which maybe a Saturday) that we will know this world, that being the day of judgement.

Friend, you also need to understand that St Paul and the vision of St Peter and of Yeshua's own words clearly state that we are free to eat what we like because it will not and can not defile us, only that which proceeds from our mouths can defile us. If you want to keep the law then you must keep it all, not bits and pieces of it.

God cut the Jewish people off the vine because time and time again they turned their backs on the Lord, do not make the same mistake as them. The Church is the body of Christ with Him as its head and to go against the Church that was established by Jesus is to go against Jesus Himself.

We must also remember the prophesy of St Paul "there will come a time when people will not listen to sound doctrine" this prophesy is not against our Church for our Church has kept the true faith through 2000 years of relentless persecution (which is still occurring).

We are Nazarene, we too are Semitic and understand the culture, you are not speaking to american evangelicals here brother, you are speaking to people who will and have died for Yeshua in ways that would make the Jews blush.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)