Christ was Crucified on Thursday


Recommended Posts

Ours isn't the only Christian church to post a schedule of the final week of Christ's life during the Easter season. Knowing that the Jewish Sabbath is on Saturday and that Christ's body was taken down from the cross because the Sabbath was nigh, Christians have assumed that He was crucified on a Friday. The normal Jewish Sabbath begins at sundown Friday night. However, it takes more research into and experience with Judaism to truly visualize how sabbath days line up during Jewish holidays. As a Jewish convert to the Church who lived in Israel for 8 years, I have added to my experience...and to my research. During one Jewish holiday in Israel (Rosh HaShanah) we celebrated three sabbath days in a row. High Holy Days and Sabbaths High Holy Days in Judaism are all Sabbaths. If a High Holy Day falls on a Friday or Sunday, Jews celebrate two Sabbath days in a row, and since Rosh HaShanah (Jewish civil new year, or the Feast of Trumpets) is a two-day...

View the full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen this theory before, and I agree that it makes a certain amount of sense. The OT prophecies of the Messiah seemed to suggest that he would be 3 days in the tomb before being resurrected, and a Friday crucifixion (so Christ is dead from Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning) doesn't quite exactly fill those prophecies. This idea of a floating Sabbath is one way to reconcile the NT description of the events with the OT prophecies. Of course, this is only one possible explanation. As near as I can tell, this debate has been going on for some time, and I don't expect an article at thirdhour is going to resolve the debate once and for all. It is interesting perspective that is worth being aware of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I have seen this theory before, and I agree that it makes a certain amount of sense. The OT prophecies of the Messiah seemed to suggest that he would be 3 days in the tomb before being resurrected, and a Friday crucifixion (so Christ is dead from Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning) doesn't quite exactly fill those prophecies. This idea of a floating Sabbath is one way to reconcile the NT description of the events with the OT prophecies. Of course, this is only one possible explanation. As near as I can tell, this debate has been going on for some time, and I don't expect an article at thirdhour is going to resolve the debate once and for all. It is interesting perspective that is worth being aware of.

3 days in the Tomb in the olden days doesn't mean 72-hours in the tomb.  1 hour before sundown is considered THAT day.  1 hour after sundown is considered the next day... so anything that happened 2 hours after the first event that happened 1 hour before sundown is the 2nd day.  Make sense?  So, one hour after the next sundown would be the 3rd day.

In any case... WHEN Jesus was laid in the tomb and arose is not really important, so Thursday or Friday doesn't matter.  What matters is that he rose again on the 3rd day to fulfill his atoning mission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@anatess2 Sure, that is the other explanation used to explain what the prophecies mean by 3 days. Like the OP's position, if it were as compelling as some say it is, then the alternative explanations would not exist. I find it interesting that different viable explanation exist and that they can coexist peacefully (most of the time) in Christianity. And, as you say, it is not a theologically significant thing. Just like with other scriptural/theological minutiae -- Was Christ born on Apr. 6 BC1 or not? Was Noah's flood truly global or merely local? Was Jonah really swallowed by a whale or is that fiction? Hemispheric BoM geography or a small scale geography? -- Different opinions and explanations abound, and they try to coexist within the Church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrShorty said:

@anatess2 Sure, that is the other explanation used to explain what the prophecies mean by 3 days.

Right.  I was just replying to your statement that the Friday crucifixion "doesn't quite fulfill the prophecies".  It does.  And the OP's alternate reading also does.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Right.  I was just replying to your statement that the Friday crucifixion "doesn't quite fulfill the prophecies".  It does.  And the OP's alternate reading also does.  

We say that it fulfills the prophecies because we have to. We have no alternative if we are to (1) believe the scriptures to be the word of God and (2) accept that Jesus was crucified on Friday. If it were to be revealed to us that the ideas given in the TH article are true and that Jesus was actually put to death on Thursday, we would very soon roll our eyes at the whole manufactured "28 hours is actually three days if you know how to count right" argument that has traditionally been put forth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Vort said:

We say that it fulfills the prophecies because we have to. We have no alternative if we are to (1) believe the scriptures to be the word of God and (2) accept that Jesus was crucified on Friday. If it were to be revealed to us that the ideas given in the TH article are true and that Jesus was actually put to death on Thursday, we would very soon roll our eyes at the whole manufactured "28 hours is actually three days if you know how to count right" argument that has traditionally been put forth.

Except that's not a manufactured argument.  That's really how Jews referred to 3rd day.  That's why the early Christians set the crucifixion to Friday even if we have zero record of it being on a Friday and that's why resurrection was set on a Sunday.  All that is known is that Jesus was took down from the cross before a Sabbath sundown.  They didn't have to set the crucifixion on a Friday and the resurrection on a Sunday.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Except that's not a manufactured argument.  That's really how Jews referred to 3rd day.  That's why the early Christians set the crucifixion to Friday even if we have zero record of it being on a Friday and that's why resurrection was set on a Sunday.  All that is known is that Jesus was took down from the cross before a Sabbath sundown.  They didn't have to set the crucifixion on a Friday and the resurrection on a Sunday.

Maybe it is true. I'm not a scholar of ancient Hebrew timekeeping. But if the article is correct and Jesus were crucified on Thursday instead of Friday, then wouldn't that make FOUR days in the tomb, not three? The time from Christ's death on Thursday until sunset is Day 1; Friday and Saturday (the Sabbath) are Days 2 and 3. Sunday morning, when Christ rose, would be Day 4, not Day 3.

If we were to find out that the article's premise is true, then we would very quickly reject the "special technical counting" argument and state that the ancient Hebrews would have understood "three days" pretty much like we do: Start on the day you're experiencing now, count forward three days, and there you have it.

Let's face it: The ONLY reason we so quickly and willingly glom onto the "28 hours is actually three days" explanation is because it justifies a minor doctrinal point that we believe (or know) to be true. We would just as quickly reject it if we were to find out by revelation that another, more compelling explanation was at work.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Vort said:

Let's face it: The ONLY reason we so quickly and willingly glom onto the "28 hours is actually three days" explanation is because it justifies a minor doctrinal point that we believe (or know) to be true. We would just as quickly reject it if we were to find out by revelation that another, more compelling explanation was at work.

That's right.  It's simply a matter of changing the Liturgical Calendar of the Catholic Church that was established since the early fathers.  Since the LDS Church do not have any expressed connection to that Liturgical Calendar, it has zero impact to the LDS Church.  The LDS do not have any special church obligations that are dependent on the day of the crucifixion or even Easter.  The Catholic Church, on the other hand, do - just the ecclesiastical rules for determination of when Easter Sunday is on a given year is established by the Catholic Church.  The LDS Church just really... follows along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share