Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Possible Error in Peshitta 1Co. 5:8? - Leavened Bread
Quote:So if you'd like to continue, please do so with minimal verbiage.  — Thomas

How do your timelines compare to this graphic?
If I'm not mistaken, I think my word count total in this discussion are less than his. But, I haven't tallied them up. Smile
Shlama brothers,

"How do your timelines compare to this graphic?"

The chart is beautiful, and I see that a lot of work went into it. But can you help me understand why it says, "Nisan 13/14 - Additional allowed Passover Day" and then it has an asterisk that goes to a footnote: "Calendar adjustment by calendar court"? Who is the "calendar court?"

Again, a lot of work was put into the chart, but where did they get the idea to say that there was an additional day for Passover, and specifically that the additional day was *before* the Torah-based requirement of eating the lamb on the 14th of Abib (i.e. the 13th) instead of the 15th?

At least, scholars like Adam Clarke (on Joh 18:28) cite Jewish sources like the Talmud to suggest that the Passover lambs could be slaughtered *later* on the closing of the 15th of Abib, which is one possible explanation for why the rulers didn't want to get defiled before eating the so-called "Passover" in Joh 18:28. I don't necessarily believe that this interpretation is the best one, but it reconciles Joh 18:28 with the synoptics.

I admit that my current timeline begins with the understanding that the phrase "first of Unleavened Bread" (Mat 26:17), or just "the day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread" (Luk 22:7) must--according to Torah--be the 14th of Abib. And this is supportable by what I showed previously from Exodus 12:15--viz., that the phrase "first day" can legitimately refer to the daylight portion of the 14th of Abib; and this is how I believe that Matthew and Luke intended it.

But Yeshua hadn't yet eaten the Passover in Mat 26:17 / Luk 22:17, and so these verses must be referring to the daylight portion of the 14th. The only thing that could change my understanding of that is a legitimate historical reference revealed that the entire nation of Israel chose to keep Passover a day early that year (as your chart seems to allow for).

But I doubt that is the case, and I've never read of that from any source anywhere. After all, it would make Yeshua a sinner, because the Torah commands Passover to be kept on the close of the 14th of Abib, and so I doubt he would put up with such nonsense, even if the Pharisees or Sanhedrin had chosen to do so. Maybe there is something to your chart's "calendar court" that I'm not aware of. But otherwise, it looks like an unacceptable error to claim that an additional day was given for Passover on the 13th of Abib (?)

Anyway, let me know what you think. Here is what I'm seeing so far from Matthew's Gospel, without any gaps between the verses.

Mat 26:17-19 (afternoon / daylight period of the 14th of Abib)
Mat 26:20-29 (late evening of the 14th of Abib)
Mat 26:30-75 (beginning / dark period of the 15th of Abib)
Mat 27:1-31 (dawn to early afternoon of the 15th of Abib)
Mat 27:32-45 (mid-afternoon to early evening of the 15th of Abib)
Mat 27:46-56 (about 3:00PM on the 15th of Abib)
Mat 27:57-61 (late evening on the 15th of Abib)
Mat 27:62-66 (16th of Abib)
Mat 28:1-15 (dawn of the 17th of Abib)

I'm going to input my 2 cents here. Three pages of long discussion and the original intent (according to the thread title) has been totally lost. The original poster's premise was flawed right from the start. The passage is not talking about how to do an actual feast performance at all. Paul is illustrating using metaphor as is clearly evident in the previous verse
"For our Pascha is the Meshiha, who hath been slain for us." I Cor 5:7.
"so that you may be (as) unleavened bread." I Cor 5:7 - clearly simile is being used.

Right up to the end of the chapter: "and put away the wicked one from among you. " I Cor 5:13

There are no instructions here whether or not to use leaven or unleavend bread in any actual feast. This has to do with how to conduct your life in Christ.
I can't explain the details of the chart I linked to. My intention was to get some reference point and overview to the whole thread and the chart was the one I found with an image search that seemed to correspond best to your chronologies.

How would the poorest members of society have come in possession of the means to celebrate passover — unleavened bread and a lamb that *they* could  sacrifice? Based on my experience of society, I expect they wouldn't, but would have to starve or eat the freely available leavened bread that the middle class wanted to get rid of, whereafter the richer members of society could gleefully discriminate them for breaking torah. I'm just speculating but I would want to know if they could "observe" torah before considering if they intended to. There is a provision in Exodus 12:4 for households to share lambs, but that system would probably collapse in a dysfunctional society.

My attempt at a time line:
Mat 26:17-19      (before tea-time / daylight period of the 13th of Abib)
Mar 14:12-16
Luk 22:7-13

Mat 26:20-39      (beginning / dark period of the 14th of Abib)
Mar 14:17-39
Luk 22:14-44
Joh 13:2-17:26

Mat 26:39-75      (ca midnight to dawn of the 14th of Abib)
Mar 14:40-72
Luk 22:45-65
Joh 18:1-27

Mat 27:1-2, 11-44 (morning of the 14th of Abib)
Mar 15:1-32
Luk 22:66-23:43
Joh 18:28-19-27

Mat 27:45         (ca 12:00 - ca 15:00 of the 14th Abib)
Mar 15:33
Luk 23:44-45a

Mat 27:46-56      (about 3:00PM on the 14th of Abib)
Mar 15:34-41
Luk 23:45b-49
Joh 19:28-37

Mat 27:57-61      (late evening on the 14th of Abib)
Mar 15:42-47
Luk 23:50-56a
Joh 19:38-42

Mat 27:62-66      (15th of Abib)
Luk 23:56b

Mat 28:1-15       (dawn of the 16th of Abib)
Mar 16:1-8a
Luk 24:1-12
Joh 20:1-10
Issues would be that:
- 1st day of unleavened bread would refer to both 14th and 15th of Nisan/Abib, evening-evening.
- Jesus and the apostles never ate lamb together in this week

Are there any more contradictions?
Jedi is correct. Smile
(12-11-2015, 03:13 PM)cgjedi Wrote: I'm going to input my 2 cents here.  Three pages of long discussion and the original intent (according to the thread title) has been totally lost.  
I have to agree there. I should have just left off where I shared my understanding of the text, which he agreed with, instead of letting myself get into this other aspect of discussion which is not what he was asking.
I have removed my last post, as it does not concern the original post.
Thank you all. I've learned a bunch, and this has been a great blessing. Sestir, if you'd like to continue discussing the timeline, please feel free to send me a message. I think it would be best. Thanks everybody.

It was nice to see that The Aramaic New Testament has no error there in the text, but rather, it shows that it is the original reading. The Greek scribe may have thought it was an error as well, and thought it should be fixed.

As cgjedi pointed out, it isn't even speaking of what type of bread is to be used!


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)