Sorry I'm late to comment but in case anyone wants to dig into it further, what I said about Barabbas mostly came from this source: Bond, H. (2013). Dating the Death of Jesus: Memory and the Religious Imagination. New Testament Studies, 59(04), 461-475
Thanks for providing your sources. I think it’s unlikely that Pilate would care about whether his released prisoner could participate in the festival or not. So I don’t see a need to push that event any farther back. Also, I’m sure the ancient Israelites were smart enough to realize the moon’s 28 day cycle. So even if the new moon happened to be on a cloudy night, they would have expected it. I think a major problem with a lot of Biblical scholarship is the assumption that religious people don’t care about truth. Personally, I want to believe the truth, because otherwise there is no point in believing it. John says, “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.” And, “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” To assume that John fabricated or altered details to add more “religious significance” to the events is to ignore the stated purpose of his book. The purpose of the gospels was to convince people about the truth of Jesus. Many of the people who first read them had been alive and could have witnessed some of these events. If the gospel writers were inaccurate, they would have been called out on it.
I love your videos and altought I also disagree with your biblical views, I respect you so much for not only giving attetion to a smaller TH-camr who is presenting a counter argument, but by doing that respectfully
@@SheikhN-bible-syndromeInvited?? In 1924?? Who invited the Quran to join the document party in 1924? Hahaha... If you mean that literary criticism of the Quran was only INVENTED IN 1924, that makes a little more sense.
Currently at 20:06 and I just realized that Jesus, who is described as God's firstborn, died on Passover like the firstborns of Egypt. Just a nugget of intertextuality I wanted to share. Edit: grammar
Wow this is A+ content. I'm really impressed. When I first watched Baker's video I just took evrrything he said for granted without really considering the theological issues it posed. I can't thank you enough for making scholarly information like this available in a condensed format. I definitely haven't devoted as much time to this topic. Thank you as well for making your points sound and easy to follow. Really seems like Baker's pesach debacle is a big ol' nothing burger. Have you considered tackling the Olivet Discourse?
Thanks, perhaps someday. Inspiring Philosophy is covering the "Jesus was a failed eschatological prophet" subject at the moment, I'll be interested in seeing more of what he has to say before I decide to weigh in.
you do realise that none of his arguments are well accepted views? he picks one author that supports his stance but bakers views are not his own but established multidisciplinary views. In a official well moderated debate, what this guy has would be laughed at. Stop watching videos and do the research yourself.
@@alanj3586Having the majority view doesn't make it the right view. Stop being disingenuous and assuming nobody researches before or after watching the video, you're probably projecting.
@@alanj3586I think one thing he’s trying to do is point out blind spots and assumptions/presuppositions that are prevalent in the scholarship, of which there are many.
I'm sure someone has said this already but the statement about the passover being a "high day" I believe refers to it being an additional sabbath. If passover fell in a Saturday then the passover sabbath and regular sabbath were celebrated together. If say the passover fell on a Friday, you would have two sabbath that week hence the term "high day" to distinguish it from the standard sabbath. For those interested, the Law is found in Leviticus 23:4-8 (ESV): These are the appointed feasts of the Lord, the holy convocations, which you shall proclaim at the time appointed for them. 5 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at twilight, is the Lord’s Passover. 6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the Lord; for seven days you shall eat unleavened bread. 7 On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall not do any ordinary work. 8 But you shall present a food offering to the Lord for seven days. On the seventh day is a holy convocation; you shall not do any ordinary work.”
A guy tried to cite a Wikipedia article, that was obviously biased, that supposedly proved that the gospels are unreliable. Goes to show how far their arguments go.
There are not “52 sabbaths” in a year. There are also a few “Great Sabbaths” which do not necessarily fall on Saturdays. They occur at “high holidays”, one of which is the First Day of Passover. The “day of Preparation for the Passover,” which, believe me (Through marriage, I have tons of Jewish and Israeli relatives, mostly Mizrachi/Sephardic) can can occur on any day of the week, depending on the year, then as now, and involves EXTRA preparation relative to a weekly Sabbath, because of special ingredients and housecleaning and disposing of all “chametz,” (leaven, i.e., every single crumb in the house). Also, “THIS” Passover may not refer to the moment, for example, you may go visit your cousin in Minnesota for Christmas and arrive on the 23rd of December and exclaim “…I really have looked forward to spending THIS Christmas with you!” Possibly Jesus was referring to the season, INCLUDING THE greatest possible holiday of all time, RESURRECTION, rather than the Passover Seder meal. After all it WOULD NOT BE THE “LAST Supper” WITH THEM. So to me, I have to consider the crucifixion May well have occurred on a Thursday Preparation Day which also aligns with “3 days and 3 nights” in the tomb.
Excellent analysis of John's gospel. Baker provides excellent charts and overview in his presentation, but sadly, at times he resorts to shoddy scholarship in order to give a backhand to Christianity.
I have never understood skeptics thinking Jesus died on 2 different dates, nor Christian's arguing there are 2 calanders. If you would be ritually pure by the evening meal then it can't be that they are worried about, it has to be a different meal. This is a case of not reading the whole Bible and just sort of assuming you know what is going on when you clearly don't. It is something I have come to expect from most skeptics and I am really heartbroken about.
I see you prefer the early (31 AD) date for Jesus' crucifixion, but have you considered the earthquake that happened in the region around 33 AD as shown by the geological record?
I'd say 30 AD and no I haven't looked into it but I'd be willing to. However, I think the statement in John 2 pretty much makes the date fairly solid, IMO. When it comes to geological data or what have you, I think we need to be a little careful.
I’ve seen that report, and as glad as I am to see the truth, the report about the earthquake is derived from biblical sources, which means, that the date was also determined by biblical sources..not from others reporting on it in non-biblical sources..so we are kind of back to square one. Correct me if I’m wrong please…but the “wisdom” is, that since Jesus was crucified in April, and he was 33 years old, and the calendar reset at his birthday…then the earthquake reported in the gospels, had to be in April, 33AD I think it’s folly to get wrapped in to such pedantic dates, when close enough is good enough, calendars change..heck, it used to be 12 months of 30 days each…The Julian calendar(used during Christs time) got replaced with our modern Gregorian…so…trying to get exact dates, is very hard, and honestly, close enough is good enough..don’t ya think
@@TestifyApologetics I feel I should qualify what I said. I looked at as many Roman sources as I could regarding the 15th year of Tiberius, and they all agree that 29 AD = 15th year. They cite the years of consuls who were in power during the 15th year, and the record shows that the those consuls ruled in 29.
I haven't watched this but anyone who wants to know more about this should read the chapter The Date of The Last Supper in Dr. Brant Pitre's work "Jesus and the Last Supper"
Pitre advocates chronological harmony between John and Synoptics, placing Jesus’ crucifixion on Friday Nisan 15th. But if it’s a year-date you’re after, I believe he leaves that open for others to inquire about. He doesn’t commit to a particular year if I remember rightly… at least not in chapter 4 of his book where he tackles the chronology issue. If you want other scholars on the same page with Pitre’s view, Lydia McGrew in Eye of the Beholder, DA Carson in his John commentary, and I’ve heard Craig Blomberg agrees as well. Carson opts for AD 30 crucifixion.
I'm glad for those variations, and undesigned coincidences in the Gospel accounts, it shows they didn't corroborate to 'get their stories straight' but represent independent testimony.
I don't think John 2:20 says the conversation took place after 46 years, it just says it took 46 years to build. The verb tense is an aorist, so that seems to suggest the construction was already finished by the time of speaking
The days before annual holy days are also called the day of preparation. The Passover is an 8 day Festival, starting on the 14th, which is the date of the first lamb's sacrifice in Egypt. The 15th was the date they left Egypt. The seven days of Unleavened bread go from the 15th to 21st. Day of Preparation is before the First Day of Unleavened Bread which is a Sabbath.
On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.
I think that the first cleansing of the Temple was just that: he was cleansing the Temple in preparation for his ministry. During Holy Week, he did not cleanse it again: the second time he came in judgement, because despite the hullabaloo of the Triumphal Entry, Israel hadn't really accepted him as who and what he was.
@@thuscomeguerriero Jesus already had a popular following, and some of what he protested would have annoyed the masses. There's a difference between what you can technically do and what you can actually get away with. The religious leaders liked to avoid controversy, and a public arrest might well have increased Jesus' popular support. When they did make a move, it was in secret, so they could present the masses with a fait accompli.
25:02 It's not a question of "two different calendars" it is a question of one calendar depending on when the newmoon of Nisan is observed. There was not any preset calendar determining in advance how many days the previous Adar or second Adar had. In France a few years ago, perhaps about ten years ago, Muslims in the West of the country and Muslims in the East of the country disagreed on what day Ramadan began, because Ramadan still works like any Jewish month, including Nisan, did then. Caesaraea Philippi is further West than Jerusalem, so Our Lord can have observed the New moon one evening earlier than the Temple did. This would by the way, along with how I found it in Nestle Aland, add up to John the Gospeller having been in Jerusalem, as a Cohen, rather than in Galilee, which is the thesis of Jean Colson.
18:51 It may be noted, Matt Baker is using a pre-determined Hebrew calendar. This has been the case since Hillel II. That's after Julian failed to restore the Temple, and the Sanhedrin was dissolved. However, in Our Lord's day, the beginning of a month was by observation of the New Moon. And, it may simply be, Our Lord observed the New Moon one evening earlier than the temple did, and as He was in Galilee, separated from the temple by Samaria, He relied on His observation. St. John who says it was "the day of preparation of the Jews" usually as narrator uses "Jews" of the enemies of Jesus, even if Jesus when speaking uses it of His nation.
Ooops, it seems Nestle Aland does have "Jews" in 19:14, but not in genitive of parascheue ... either way, Pilate would be concerned with the date held by the Temple and the population of Jerusalem, which had mostly all of them been in Jerusalem at the beginning of Nisan.
I am working on getting better lighting and a higher quality camera. Just trying to make due with what I got in the meantime. It's frustrating to me too and I might try adjusting what I can
I was surprised he concluded Jesus died on a Friday. There are people who think it may have been Wednesday or Thursday based on the three days and third day references. This would have been possible, because the first and last days of the Passover are types of Sabbaths, so he rose the morning after a normal sabbath, but he could have died on the day before the end of Passover. As you pointed out, they had dinner every night during Passover where unleavened bread was served, and lamb may or may not have been served on the different nights, and the time it was eaten affects which day it was. I'm not suggesting I believe it wasn't Friday, but it's odd that a skeptic didn't bring this up, because they often do to point out the discrepancy in how long Jesus was in the tomb. Regardless, the gospel accounts let us know that the people all knew that Sunday was the day Jesus predicted to be raised, regardless of the cultural interpretation of his words. A common comparison people use today as an analogy is the term "next Sunday." That usually means the Sunday of the next week, but if you said it on a Monday, most people would assume you mean six days later, while saying it on a Saturday would mean eight days later. If we didn't know what day someone in say 1950 said next Sunday, but we knew everyone then meant a specific Sunday in 1950, then there's no contradiction just lost information about the day it was spoken.
It would seem to me that the concern with preparing for the Passover indicates that it was the ceder. The priests and Pharisees would not want to be ceremonially unclean at any time during the feast of unleavened bread. Every meal that week was special, at least by not including yeast. The Pharisees were known for making up their own rules. Jesus repeatedly rebuked them for it. They undoubtedly had extra rules and regulations for Passover. We don't know all of them. The feast of unleavened bread was eight days with special solemn festivals the first and eighth days. I have seen a report that the Jewish calendar was disrupted because the Romans would not allow the necessary observation.
Jesus celebrated the feast of unleavened bread according to the essene calendar which always fall on a Tuesday. that was 11th of Nisan in the jewish calendar. he died on the 14th of Nisan 33AD according to the jewish calendar. mark was Essene scribe and recounted and narrates according to essene sensibilities. John narrates according to jewish custom. this so-called contradiction wasn't refuted until the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls and other archeological finds that happened and analyzed in the 20th and 21st century. this only goes to show the reliability of the gospels. I doubt they wrote with theology in mind. just a slavish narration of events
The Pharisees asked for a Sign, Yeshua said " You wicked & Adulterous Generation ask for a sign, None will be Given but the Sign of Jonah. Just Jonah was in the Belly of the fish for 3days & 3nights so shall the Son of Man be in the Belly of the Earth for 3days & 3nights". .....i believe Yeshua Died Good Friday & Rose on the (Saturday Night) Sunday Morning...But then that's only two Nights in the Grave 🤔 When Mary Magdalene saw Yeshua he said, "Do not cling to me as i have not Ascended to my Father yet" 🤔 *1Peter **3:18**-22* might give us a Glue where he spent the last night & Day , Releasing the Imprisoned Spirits from Noah's day 🕊🕊🕊 *HEBREWS 1:5-14* 🕊🕊🕊 Shalom & Godbless
Tacitus was on some kind of special council for Romans and would have access to direct sources. Look it up. Can't think if the name. But odds are he had records about all executions under Pontius Pilate and controversies such as the one found in the Gospel.
@@jacoblee5796 People are not saying he’s an eyewitness, nor even a Christian lol. The case is simply that Tacitus simply is another source that confirms Pontius Pilate the Roman general was the one who executed Jesus. The fact that he’s not a Christian in fact yet he’s not arguing over the historicity of the event points to it actually being something that occurred. The claim isn’t that Tacitus proves the resurrection or Christianity . Like Testify said in this video it only is a problem when Christians try to overstate the case.
@@jacoblee5796 I'll try to find it my guy but it was like an Order or some kind of Committee Tacitus was on that likely gave him access to all the records he needed to write his history. Including execution logs and incidents of notoriety as recorded in the Gospel.
@@jacoblee5796 30 separate instances in the Annals where Tacitus is careful to substantiate a statement or distance himself from a claim or report about which he was less than certain -C.W. Mendell, Tacitus: The Man and his Work, 1957, p. 205 No. Tacitus was extremely careful to remove history from hearsay. This objection that Tacitus only repeated hearsay, is nothing but a coping mechanism for mythicists...
@@jacoblee5796 If you already knew that Tacitus only repeats what Christians asserted why did you even ask if he mentions Jesus? And this hypothesis is just very dubious and unlikely because Tacitus was the top number one official historian of the entire Roman Empire. He had access to libraries and official records
This might be one of my favorite videos of yours! In regards to John's account of the crucifixion, how do you understand the messianic fulfillment of Ps 34:20? It feels taken wildly out of context, or not very prophetic. Even as typology it's kinda odd
As far as I remember, John doesn't cite specifically to Psalms there. I think it's more likely a reference to the prohibition in the Mosaic law against breaking a bone of the passover lamb (e.g., Ex 12:46). Bible editions have different cross-references, and that cross-reference may be less "this is the verse John is citing", and more "here is a verse about a comparable subject". In any case, "fulfilled" doesn't have to mean prophetic fulfillment but can just mean "this event in Jesus's life gives a deeper meaning to this Old Testament verse. God's promise that not one bone will be broken applies to all righteous people, but it was fulfilled in a singular way in Jesus's death.
Jesus said all of the scriptures testify of him. So we can find hints of him throughout. God orchestrated many events of David’s life to parallel and foreshadow Jesus. So David says “a righteous man’s bones are not broken.” Who was more righteous than Jesus? David also wrote Psalm 22, which is an even closer parallel of the crucifixion. Jesus quoted it on the cross. Also, as Jonathancast points out, Jesus fulfilled the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. God gave those instructions to the Israelites as a foreshadowing of Jesus.
I've heard and read each side of these arguments, and questions of Whether or not the Biblical accounts are cohesive. WELL, it makes ABSOLUTE SENSE that Spiritual Matters would be too Complex for us PEA-BRAIN human beings! As I take in the WHOLE PICTURE, I See MORE than enough evidence that the Bible is the MOST UNIQUE BOOK on the Planet-----The WORD of GOD! AND; Everything concerning Christ, SMACKS of the TRUTH! BOTTOM LINE; Salvation is for those who TRUST GOD, and Jesus Christ, the "SON" of GOD.
Know what’s funny, Baker made several mistakes..that I caught..the angels at the tomb listed in John being listed as zero..when it was a actually 2…and he misspelled unleavened bread..he spelled it unleaven bread 18:41 Easily overlooked and they don’t take one thing away from his presentation of the facts that he presented..I dunno, just seems like a double standard, judging the Bible by one and himself and others by another
Thanks so much for all your hard work in presenting these videos. All the little nuances you present bolster my somewhat weak faith. I am addicted to watching your videos. By your comparing the different scriptural accounts I get a fuller picture of what is going on. It’s almost like I should feel guilty for enjoying the Bible when in the past reading it often felt like a chore.
2 things. Day of preparation is modified because in this case it is preparation for the Passover, not preparation for the Shabbas. Not necessarily Friday. Second, and I honestly forget the source , but Jewish historians have said that because of the two calendars argument is a factual one, and the Priests would have taken advantage of the income available in serving two days of the Seder.
Mark 14:12 - the disciples obviously had been with Jesus in Galilee, so they would also have begun Nisan one day earlier than the temple, if my hypothesis is correct.
After watching this the thing that still makes me the most angry is the complete and total denial of the impact of Christ on history and the creation of our current calendar by Pope Gregory. BC AND AD! DRIVES ME NUTS! 😤
Can you do a video on the old testament genealogies if you haven't already. Apparently they don't make sense but I don't know. I kind of just skip over them a bit... ?
It's important to note that Jesus wasn't protesting a corrupt system. The money changers are literally required by the law. Jesus was saying that Zechariah's prophecy that they would no longer need them was coming true.
If the Passover was that evening as the video claims, then the leaders would be unclean until evening and at sunset they would be fine, and thus be able to eat the meal. So even if there was a different chronology in John the verse makes no sense in the Jewish context as the uncleanliness lasts until the sundown of that day and thus they would be clean again to eat the passover eaten at after sundown. So the meal must refer to one eaten before sundown. So it seems the chronology presented here makes sense.
In "The crucifixion of the King of Glory" dr Eugenia Scarvelis Constantinou gives a description of the procedures surrounding the sacrifices of the day of preparation, based on the Mishna Pesachim 5. The sacrifices started at 3 pm at the blast of the shofar horn, but were so plentiful that there was three consecutive groups as the many thousands of people with their families lambs could not fit in the temple all at once even if they used the outer yards to make room for more people. Priests were passing the cups with blood to each other in a long line so it could be poured over the altar. The entire temple courtyard was washed down between groups to remove the blood filling up the gutters. This was an industrial scale operation and it lasted some time. Another, less gruesome, factoid dr Scarvelis Constantinou mentions is that after the sacrificial slaughter each family took the lamb home to cook it in a very special way. The lamb was roasted in an oven built for the occasion and used only once. The ovens were dome shaped as the lamb was to be roasted in a standing position, held that way by a skewer going from the rear all the way to the head, Another wooden skewer was inserted across its back spreading the front legs. The lamb looked like it had been crucified. John the baptist called it correctly: "“Behold, the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world!" The custom of eating lambs at passover stopped at 70AD.
Regarding when John's gospel was written, many people assert a pre-70AD writing of the text because of the lack of mention of the destruction of the temple. Is that any arguments to be made for an early dating that don't argue from silence?
One thing I like about this guy is that he makes it clear that there is a lot of room in how to look at the bible. No inerrant. Troublesome and mixed messages. And revelations to many Christians who follow that they believed only because they never made any intention to look into the truth on their own. By the way, most scholars do agree that a man named Jesus or some messianic/apocalyptic figure lived. But the bible, both the OT and NT, clearly reveal that he was a failed figure as so many existed back then and since then.
the apostles ask where he would eat the passover diner as it needed some time to prepare, but Iesus tells them to eat it before the feast starts thus he consumes leavened bread. The problem arises from catholics who moved away from consuming artos leavened bread in eucharist and consume unleavened like the jews. Now how a priest explains it ( and I agree) is that the jews counted the day before passover 14 nissan as the first day of the feast which lasted 8 days including the official 7 days. Now while the day was a regular day and both the evening and the morning they would eat regular meals, they would have to remove on 14 Nissan all the leavened bread from the home , sacrifice the lambs, clean and do other preparations. So there is no contradiction just a misunderstanding from the catholics and english speaking people in general. In the greek version you have a different term for the holiday which is called feast of uleavened read and the name of the bread in the diner which is leavened. Also notice that the apostles do not eat lamb and sour herbs but bread, some sort of soup and wine. This explains both the reason why the judge releases the convinct on that day and many other issues. Also as a note regarding ritual cleansing yes it could be done fast but consider how tired everyone was with the preparations.
18:01 _"which every Jew knows means the day before Saturday"_ Not in the context of Pesakh. _Then_ it means the day after Sunset of which the Pesakh begins with the Seder.
The best way to see what day Jesus dies is to go to the old testament and look at the dates of the feasts. Passover, unleavened bread, and first fruits. The passover meal is done on Nisan 14 at evening by the people at their homes. The priests sacrifice the lambs on Nisan 14 during the day. There are 2 sabbaths before the resurrection. The first sabbath is a high sabbath which is for the unleavened bread feast and then the regular sabbath. Jesus would have died on Thursday and thus giving us 3 days and 3 nights before the resurrection.
16:47 I must say I do not find it very likely that someone would neglect to mention multiple angels and instead specifically talk about there being a singular angel, as in Mathew and Mark. Because one angle is a miracle, multiple are literally many simultaneous miracles standing before you, this scenario would be more like your two daughters had come back from the park and one says "There were two dogs with human faces at the park" while the other says "There was a dog with a human face at the park." One of your daughters is incorrect. However, I also believe this neglect and the analogy itself, comparing the genuis of the biblical authors to your daughters to brush aside apparent factual conflicts, is rather at odds with your previous point that the authors of the Gospels are masterful, detail oriented historians, which I wholeheartedly agree with.
“As this happened at the time when the feast of unleavened bread was celebrated, which we call the Passover…” Josephus, Antiquities 14.21 “As the Jews were celebrating the feast of unleavened bread, which we call the Passover…” Josephus, Antiquities 18.29 “And, indeed, at the feast of unleavened bread, which was now at hand, and is by the Jews called the Passover…” Josephus, Wars 2.10
If you pay your rent on a Friday evening as the work week is ending and the bank is closing and you leave a check on the landlords desk knowing that the bank is closed till Monday and then early Monday morning you walk by the landlords desk and the check is still sitting on there desk so you grab it and put it in your pocket and start to walk away and the landlord says to you as your walking away "hey! that's my rent money" and you keep walking and turn and say "I already paid my rent " and the land lord says "it doesn't count unless I keep the check wise guy" . Tell me who is right in this situation? the landlord? or the tenant?
the date of crucifixion is definite as 14th of Nisan AD 33 because it was a full moon falling on a Friday and there was also a blood moon lunar eclipse as attested as being observed by the New Testament. Jesus died at 3pm just as the 2nd tamid (daily sheep offering in the temple) was being signaled to be offered by the trumpet of the temple. the Passover lamb cannot be slain before the signal of 2nd tamid nor can it be slain if it is cloudy (then it would have to wait till evening). do your math again. Jesus would have been baptized on Yom Kippur of 29 AD. thanks to the Dead Sea scrolls, we now know that the last supper occurred on the prior Tuesday of that week, 11th of Nisan. that was the passover and feast of unleavened bread according to the Essenes. Mark was narrating his events according to his Essene calendar. from the evidence in the gospels, we know that Jesus and his disciples celebrated passover in the essene quarter because of the man carrying the jar of water. Jesus must have been arrested after 9pm of 11 Nisan and interrogated in the kangaroo court that same night by annas and the scribes, and imprisoned in his dungeon that you can still visit in Jerusalem. the formal trial before the Sanhedrin was on 12th of Nisan after the first trumpet at 9am. official work ends at 3pm at the second trumpet and he was either held again at the dungeon or holding cell by the Sanhedrin or sent to the praetorium (the palace complex of Herod the great - excavated by shimon gibson). the interrogation of Jesus by pilate and Herod antipas would have been on 13th of Nisan. Jesus was passed back and forth between the 2 palaces in front of each other. pilate would have the final presentation of Jesus before the people on the western double gate to the palace. the act of clemency would have been a natural act to perform on a feast day in the eyes of pilate as it was a virtue in the roman religion as 'clementia', an act practiced by the emperor himself, and judges of the Roman Empire. Jesus would have been scourged in the southern barracks of the palace complex and exited the eastern or northern gates of the palace complex on His way to Golgotha (present location of the Holy Sepulcher) which is only an 8-15 minute walk away
I love it when testify starts with the words "prominent skeptic"... I can see bart ehrman rolling his eyes hearing that while thinking "shoot testify is refering to me again"... 🤣🤣🤣
The Date of the Passover varies up to two weeks between the priests of Zadok at Temple Israel and the House of Phinehas, because the Israelites were divided , Samaria and Judea, and if Jesus traveled to Jerusalem, he could celebrate the Passover twice. If in Jerusalem the High Priest, noting the delay in the Full Moon , could hold off the arrival of Passover , a day or so since he had power to alter the Calendar and invoke a Holy Day by Proclamation . There were times when at war, Passover was delayed several months, that a legal holiday did not occur unless the High Priest gave a signal to the Trumpeters to blow the horns, A Special Day of Preparation could turn a Seven Day Passover Week into EIGHT DAYS or longer, while outside the Temple District, Jews would only have a seven day Passover, because there was no High Priest to incur a delay or abrogate the natural observation of the stars. So Time as Malleable, based on the power of a High Priest ,like Joshua in the Book of Joshua, who during a War with Adoni Zedek , held up his hands to the Sun and Moon and stopped the Biblical Clock so that the SABBATH DA"Y would not legally arrive until the war or battle was won. So Joshua held up his hands to the Sun and Moon over the Valley of Ajalon and time stood still, in the legal sense of observation. So the Sabbath and the Passover dates do not come naturally , the assertion of a Messiah Priest can delay the day and hour. So Jesus said "No man knows the day or hour, but only the Father" meaning that the issue of TIME is a legal declaration by whomever is the HIGH PRIEST OF TEMPLE ISRAEL who must signal the Angels to blow the Trumpets. In the Passover Week when Jesus died , the High Priest added an EIGHTH DAY to the week, making Saturday occur twice, and making the stretch from Friday to Sunday a THREE DAY TRIP, instead of two days, as you might think. So Jesus died on the Sixth Day, Friday , but the Priest added a SPECIAL DAY OF PREPARATION because the Moon was not yet full and the alignment would be the Full Moon the Morning Star and the Easter Sunrise to come as the same evening and day, and that meant 72 hours passed from the time Jesus died to the moment of the Resurrection , THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS because the SEVENTH DAY SABBATH was extended by Temple Israel to repeat and be as two days instead of one, so the Full Moon could arrive to match the moment of the Morning Star and the Easter Spring Vernal Equinox Sunrise to align together and produce a day without darkness over Jerusalem. The Full Moon the Morning Star in the GAP and the EASTER SUNRISE made a day without Darkness over the Temple ISrael, and that was figured to be THE FIRST DAY OF CREATION in repetition and that is the moment of the RESURRECTION OF CHRIST, The Catholic Faith is the TRUTH and all other information is wrought with a lack of knowledge of God's Law. Without Temple Israel the Jews would only observe a SEVEN DAY PASSOVER WEEK, but with Temple Israel the High Priest had the power to stop the CLOCK and prolong the Passover Week to make the Astronomical Calculation of Easter to match the FIRST DAY OF LIGHT OR CREATION So Jesus died on Friday or day six of a special EIGHT DAY PASSOVER, that made his rest in the tomb prolonged to THREE DAYS AND NIGHTS, 72 Hours. There is no error in what I wrote here, The Catholic Church has the accurate information to figure out the Special Day of Preparation , how it confuses you , because you are ignorant.
If Mark was written while yet the Temple stood, the days of the week in Jerusalem, were by the Priestly Rule of Thumb, but if the Gospel of John was written after the Temple fell then the Calendar Days were ruled by the Jews without the Temple and the days shifted . Passover was observed up to two weeks earlier if you lived in Northern Israel, which was divided apart from the Temple in Jerusalem so there was two TRADITIONS, one in Shiloh ( Samaria) and one Jerusalem, in Judea, a kingdom separate from Israel. So Jesus traveled back and forth from Jerusalem and Samaria and would often repeat the Liturgical Festivals based on a difference between Mount Gerizim and Zion . The Judahites and the Ephraimites warred for centuries, and to this day there are Priests of Samarai still varying their Calendar differently than the Jews in Jerusalem. But in Jerusalem the Priest of Temple Israel had declaratory power to alter the days of the week , making his RULE OF THUMB more powerful than mere astronomy in setting up a Calendar. That is why Mark which is written earlier may report the days of Passover differently than the reports used in the Gospel of John, because the TRADITION was altered by the end of the Temple in Jerusalem, and without guidance you think there is a contradiction only you discovered, which is your own fault that you did not ask the right questions.
The Resurrection accounts from Mathew and John seem to contradict each other. Mark claims an Angel is seated on the stone covering the tomb (which had been rolled over), while John claims that 2 Angels are seated inside the tomb where Jesus was laid. Can you make a video looking into this?
Matthew has the Angel sitting on the stone and then they all go in to the tomb. Luke has two angels in the tomb. All four accounts agree there is at least one Angel in the tomb who speaks. Two accounts say a second Angel which is an extra detail.
@@margaretrutherford5548 Mathew's account only makes note of one angel sitting on the stone, doesn't mention another angel. Luke's account describes 2 angels in the tomb. John's account describes two angels in the tomb. . Another difference in the accounts is what the angels say to Mary, and the other women.
This was a great video. Also, I look forward to a future video defending Papias' reliability, especially against Bart Ehrman. His objection to Papias' witness to Mark is desperate, and hilariously dumb. I also think a video defending the use of the term 'logia' to be a reference to scripture, and not to a sayings gospel would be nice, if you got the chance. I believe J.B. Lightfoot wrote an excellent essay on this topic a while back.
@TestifyApologetics what does it mean in 1 Corinthians 15:45 when it said the last Adam (Jesus) a quickening spirit? Is this an allegory for Christ being the only way to heaven, because I know as a fact christ didn't come back as a spirit but as a physical ressurected being
Quickening is just an obsolete word for life-giving. If you read the verse in context, 1 Corinthians 15:44 talks about our resurrection bodies being spiritual, so Paul clearly isn't using the word spiritual to mean non-physical - since the whole concept of resurrection is about physical bodies. In that verse Paul isn't using allegory, he's simply saying that resurrection bodies aren't going to be the same as the bodies we have now. So in verse 45 he's contrasting Adam's role of becoming a living being with Christ's role of giving eternal life to the saints. He's not using allegory, he's just using terms that aren't immediately obvious to most 21st century Westerners.
Good stuff as usual, Erik. I do want to add this because I've written on the subject before. Given the reference to the 15th year of Tiberius, as well as the reference in John, Jesus's baptism is in either 28 or 29 with his first temple incident possibly being the next year (depending on what time of year that baptism happened). Here are some extracts from that thing I wrote: Tiberius’s first year is typically linked to the time after Augustus’s death in August of 14 CE. Velleius Paterculus, one of the authors cited for Tiberius’s co-regency, nevertheless refers to “the past 16 years” in his summary of Tiberius’s reign near the end of his work that he wrote in 30 CE (Comp. Rom. Hist. 2.126). Likewise, Suetonius, the other author adduced for this purpose, clearly reckons Tiberius’s reign to have ended in his 23rd year in 37 CE (Tib. 73.1). Others who reckoned Tiberius’s years in this fashion include Josephus (J.W. 2.168, 180; cf. Ant. 18.224), Tacitus (Dial. 17; Ann. 6.51), Theophilus of Antioch (Autol. 3.27), Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 1.21), Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 8), Hippolytus of Rome (Chron.), Cassius Dio (Rom. Hist. 58.28.5-6; cf. 56.30.5), Eusebius (Chron. [both translations, meaning Jerome agrees]), and the Chronography of 354. (I cite other evidence too, but here I'm focusing on what will be more easily accessible.) As such, all sources converge, using their different systems somewhere in 14/15 CE. Since Luke nowhere else indicates a divergent chronology, he is likely operating on a chronology that was generally assumed, including by Theophilus and anyone else in his audience. All these sources we have noted vary from each other in details, they come from a variety of areas, they rarely evince dependence on another source in this list for this information, and yet they agree with beginning Tiberius’s reign in either the year of or after Augustus’s death, rather than a few years prior, and this includes the two sources relied upon for the co-regency argument. We thus have cogent reasons for thinking that this chronological assumption of when Tiberius’s reign began was established early and shared widely from those early days. As we have noted already, there is much more significant variation of how long Augustus reigned, depending on if one counts from the death of Julius Caesar or the year thereafter (44/43 BCE), his victory at Actium (31 BCE), his conquest of Alexandria or the year thereafter (30/29 BCE), or his reception of the honorifics Augustus and Princeps from the Senate (27 BCE). By contrast, we see much less significant variation about the length of Tiberius’s reign and about when his reign began. In terms of precision, a number of options are possible for one to consider the beginning of Tiberius’s reign. Alden Mosshammer summarizes the basic options well, “The first year of Tiberius could be backdated to 19 August AD 14 [from 17 September AD 14], to the Roman year beginning 1 January AD 14, postdated to 1 January AD 15, or synchronized with any of several civil calendars in the eastern empire that began in the fall.” It is not always clear when a given author is using one dating system as opposed to another, as Eusebius demonstrates that the same author could use different dating systems for different works, as he places Pilate’s installment as procurator to either the 12th (Hist. eccl. 1.9-10) or 13th (Chron. [both translations]) year of Tiberius, depending on which starting point he uses. But in both cases, the implied date of the 15th year of Tiberius is 28/29 CE. Jack Finegan shows how it is possible-based on the calendar, the use of an accession year or non-accession year system, and including the invalid co-regency system-to date the beginning of the 15th year as early as 26 and its end to as late as 30. But most likely, as John Meier demonstrates through his use of various calendars that Luke could have been assuming (Judean, Roman, or Antiochene/Syrian), the 15th year falls somewhere in the range of October of 27- December of 29 CE. All the cited methods overlap with the year 28 CE; the only question is if this was the start of Tiberius’s 15th year or the end of it. Given that Luke is most likely assuming a calendar his audience implicitly understands, and given Luke’s frequent references (especially in Acts) to Roman politics, it is most likely that his calendar for this purpose is Roman, which would eliminate any portion of 27 CE from consideration. That leaves us with the year in question being either 28 or 29 CE. Further confirmation of these dates may appear in John 2:20, with its reference to it being 46 years since the temple’s construction at the first Passover of Jesus’s ministry. This work was completed in 19/18 BCE (Ant. 15.380-425). As there is only one celebration marking this construction (15.421-423), it is reasonable to think that both the temple itself and the enclosures were completed around the same time, and so there are not two potential dates to reckon from. This would place this Passover after Jesus’s baptism in either Nisan, 29 or Nisan, 30 CE. (The latter date is possible when taking into consideration that the year in the Jewish calendar at this time was often reckoned from Tishri to Tishri, rather than Nisan to Nisan.) For more info and sources, check out the post here: krharriman.substack.com/p/when-was-jesus-born-part-10. Or you can see the whole series here: krharriman.substack.com/p/when-was-jesus-born-an-analysis-of.
28:20 Your explanation is even better than mine, so, you have just about destroyed the idea behind Michael Caerularius' claim "Jesus must have used leavened breads" ... I'm glad to be back in Catholicism, as revert from Orthodoxy!
but he did use leavened. Also the fact is not that relevant except for catholics since the bread is transformed into the body of Christ. I am sorry to hear you return to the catholic heresies
@@hglundahl according to the gospels. In greek unlike english there are different words for leavened and unlevened bread. asumos for unleavened and artos for leaven. This was kept in some romance languages like romanian azime/lipie (as a note sometimes lipie is not used with the meaning of azime but is the correct meaning) versus paine but this is not present in english. In the gospels it says as the first day of the asumos was coming the disciples asked Iesus where they would eat the Pascha.... And then he had thanked, broken the artos and said: This is my body... Basically the last supper had happened the evening between 13 and 14 Nissan. 14 Nissan was considered the first day of the feast because in the morning they would eat or remove all artos from the house and then prepare for the actual feast including cutting the lambs. As a note most would fast from the morning meal to the evening one in this day. Catholics go against this belief insisting on using asumos. While not a mistake from the first centuries christians tried to separate themselves from jews that did not accept Iesus when it came to the celebration of Passover, starting from the date, the usage of artos and so on.
@@Ciprian-IonutPanait _"asumos for unleavened and artos for leaven."_ Sorry, but: "ho azymos artos" is unlevened bread "ho zymotos artos" is leavened bread Azymos and Zymotos are adjectives, and artos is the word for bread in both cases. In the time of Caerularios, "ho azymos artos" was shortened to "ho azymos" so as to have "azymos" feel like a noun. He projected this late usage into the much earlier texts of the New Testament. Your history of the last supper is mangled. Here is a quote from the Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 26: *17 And on the first day of the Azymes, the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the pasch 18 But Jesus said: Go ye into the city to a certain man, and say to him: the master saith, My time is near at hand, with thee I make the pasch with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus appointed to them, and they prepared the pasch.* This was obviously, at least to Jesus and His disciples, the 14th of Nisan. Preparing pasch = throwing out leavened bread to birds, and so on. _"While not a mistake from the first centuries christians tried to separate themselves from jews that did not accept Iesus when it came to the celebration of Passover, starting from the date, the usage of artos and so on."_ It is probable that the use of zymotos artos came for the motive you mentioned, overriding what Jesus had actually done, and that in the region of the later Byzantine and Hierosolymite, perhaps also Antiochene patriarchies. Alexandria and Rome, meanwhile, used azymos artos, which occasioned Caerularius to pretend the Latin usage was "a Jewish and Coptic/Monophysite heresy" ...
@@Ciprian-IonutPanait _"asumos for unleavened and artos for leaven."_ Sorry, but: "ho azymos artos" is unlevened bread "ho zymotos artos" is leavened bread Azymos and Zymotos are adjectives, and artos is the word for bread in both cases. In the time of Caerularios, "ho azymos artos" was shortened to "ho azymos" so as to have "azymos" feel like a noun. He projected this late usage into the much earlier texts of the New Testament. Your history of the last supper is mangled. Here is a quote from the Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 26: *17 And on the first day of the Azymes, the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the pasch 18 But Jesus said: Go ye into the city to a certain man, and say to him: the master saith, My time is near at hand, with thee I make the pasch with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus appointed to them, and they prepared the pasch.* This was obviously, at least to Jesus and His disciples, the 14th of Nisan. Preparing pasch = throwing out leavened bread to birds, and so on. _"While not a mistake from the first centuries christians tried to separate themselves from jews that did not accept Iesus when it came to the celebration of Passover, starting from the date, the usage of artos and so on."_ It is probable that the use of zymotos artos came for the motive you mentioned, overriding what Jesus had actually done, and that in the region of the later Byzantine and Hierosolymite, perhaps also Antiochene patriarchies. Alexandria and Rome, meanwhile, used azymos artos, which occasioned Caerularius to pretend the Latin usage was "a Jewish and Coptic/Monophysite heresy" ...
All who are given come to Christ. This is saving faith. This means saving faith is the result of being given, not the grounds (foreseen or otherwise) of being given. Jesus never cast out the one coming to him- those who come are those who have been given none else. After the grumbling of the Jews Jesus explains their continued unbelief No one has the capacity or ability to come to Christ in and of themselves. How many really believe this? The Father must draw anyone for them to be capable of coming to the Son
On an unrelated note. Because I have attention issues I tend to listen to videos rather than watch them. Because of this, and because I watch Useful Charts every so often, at one point I got really confused and thought when he was speaking it was you and it really tripped me up. I mean, you don’t particularly sound that similar, but my brain Short circuited and I was spinning for a bit
I don't know why but your topics are quite interesting and make me wanna click it right away. But after like a minute or 2 I'm getting bored. Maybe because of your accent. Sometimes I have a hard time processing your words. Please speak slow and clear or at least add a subtitle. So that people like me who are not from English speaking countries can understand well as well. Thanks
I've tried commenting on this video with a linked to a Hebrew calendar conversion site so that you can look at where dates fell on the Hebrew calendar back in 27-36ad (among other years,) but both times I posted it my comment was errored out and deleted. Weird
Tbf with the solar calendar argument that's not really a hoop. The essienes used the solar caledar as found in Enoch. Enoch was popular among early Christians, even being quoted by a brother of Jesus. Seems likely he DID use the solar Second Temple Period Jewish Calendar.
@@shinryuken5423I think Jesus died on the Friday. I think people overlook there were two nights on the Friday. Luke 23:44 and Genesis 1:5. This balances the two days, sun standing still Joshua 10
@Mark Talbot why does it need to balance out? I read the verses you posted, and I don't see how they would tie in to the crucifixion without reading too much into it. The sign of Jonah was the sign that would be given, and that was understood to be 3 days and 3 nights.
@@shinryuken5423 doesn't need to balance it out but God is a God of order so it 'fits'. No other way to describe the darkness at the crucifixion than as night. This isn't a hill I'm going to die on, but in my mind the best explanation of the 3 days 3 nights
Thank you, brother It's actually somewhat comforting to get the sort of opposition offered by someone like Baker, say - a chap who, to some degree at least, tries to be neutral when discussing the historicity of Jesus Christ Kind regards Kim
It should be noted that the Day of Preparation did not have to be a "Friday" or the day before THE Sabbath. There's a little known fact that important festival days were counted as Sabbath days as well and these could happen on differing days of the week one year to the next. There can also be Sabbath stacking. If a festival Sabbath occurs on the day before or after the weekly Sabbath then your Sabbath rest could go on for more than one consecutive day. Just something for us all to think about before we insist Jesus died on a Friday.
@@jamesajiduah2001 the lambs are killed at twighlight of the 14th day which means after preparation time to cook the meal doesn't actually begin til the 15th.
Yeshua Was Cruxified Friday 3rd April 33AD (14th Nissan Jewish Passover) the only day in the 1st Century there was an Earthquake in that Area also An Eclipse as Recorded in the Gospels *Matthew 27:45-54 / Amos 8:9-11*
Is this concept different than playing with the definitions. If you call the creator and sustainer of reality a "computer" and then name something else god you aren't discussing the same thing anymore. Not operating as intended is obviously true of our universe though.
Hmmm, well I think you are being too hard on Useful Charts. I think we need to watch his video in the light of being literature rather than trying to be historically accurate.
16:06 Sorry, the word "Friday" doesn't appear in the gospels. You infer this, obviously, from the next day being called a sabbath - but the trick is to account both the regular weekly sabbath and the special sabbath that was passover. Good studies exist online that make the case for Jesus being crucified on a Wednesday, dying around 3PM, being taken down and hastily buried between then and sundown (when passover commenced). Then being in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights, being resurrected Saturday evening, so that by the "first of the week", the women went very early to his tomb and found he was already risen (note: NOT that he just got up, or words to that effect). In any event, your work is still very useful, in that, because you've pinned the year down to about a 3 year range, only one of those years will have had its Passover on Thursday. That should be enough to pinpoint the exact year.
Your chart is completely wrong. The passover lamb is killed on the evening (before sunset) of nissan 14 and the passover meal is eaten in the home throughout the night wich is the start of nissan 15. Feast of unleavened bread starts on nissan 15. The first day and the seventh day of unleavened bread are special/high sabbaths. Jesus is crucified in the evening/towards the end of nissan 14 and his body is put in tomb by the time nissan 15 starts wich was a special sabbath. Jesus says he will be in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights just like jonah. On the first day of the week (nissan 18) the women go at sunrise to the tomb and jesus was already raised from the dead. Jesus body was in the tomb for three full days and three full nights. That does not work with a friday crucifiction, thats like 1 day and 2 nights
well yes and no. You consider 3 days as 3 24 hour days but jews considered part of a day as a day in certain cases , so you have part of friday, all saturday and part of sunday, so 3 days. And if you still want to scoff. When He died the darkness that fell on the earth for a few hours can be considered the start of a new day. Either way 3 days is correct
What do you think about about the 69 Week- Years of [Daniel 9:24-26] calculated in (483 historical Years or ca 476,4 biblical Years) The starting point according to Daniel 9 is the order to restore Jerusalem and from then 62 + 7 Year-Years to the Messiah coming as king. We know according to Nehem 2:1-8 the Order was given in 445 bc and from then the 476,4 years we come in the year 32 ( ther is no years 0 bc)
Very interesting proposal. It also depends when in his year 476 when Daniel heard his prophetic vision . And then we also have to factor when they celebrated New Years as it wasn’t inherently January 1sr like ours. This could make April 7th 33 AD quite a plausible date that aligns with all the other data.
The supposed contradiction goes away when you realize that Jesus died on a Wednesday and that there were two sabbaths that week. A basic study of the feast days will greatly help the truth seeker.
Sorry I'm late to comment but in case anyone wants to dig into it further, what I said about Barabbas mostly came from this source:
Bond, H. (2013). Dating the Death of Jesus: Memory and the Religious Imagination. New
Testament Studies, 59(04), 461-475
Okay thanks 👍
Thanks for providing your sources. I think it’s unlikely that Pilate would care about whether his released prisoner could participate in the festival or not. So I don’t see a need to push that event any farther back.
Also, I’m sure the ancient Israelites were smart enough to realize the moon’s 28 day cycle. So even if the new moon happened to be on a cloudy night, they would have expected it.
I think a major problem with a lot of Biblical scholarship is the assumption that religious people don’t care about truth. Personally, I want to believe the truth, because otherwise there is no point in believing it.
John says, “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.” And, “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”
To assume that John fabricated or altered details to add more “religious significance” to the events is to ignore the stated purpose of his book.
The purpose of the gospels was to convince people about the truth of Jesus. Many of the people who first read them had been alive and could have witnessed some of these events. If the gospel writers were inaccurate, they would have been called out on it.
@@bbgun061 Only one Bible Believe Scholar is truthful - Mike Licona. And his reward for it is being called a heretic from fellow believers.
I love your videos and altought I also disagree with your biblical views, I respect you so much for not only giving attetion to a smaller TH-camr who is presenting a counter argument, but by doing that respectfully
The fact that they don't treat the Koran this way shows that they value their lives more than truth.
We do destroy the crapkoran that way and it's even easier to break apart because it was invited in 1924
@@SheikhN-bible-syndromeIt's only off recent that textual criticism on the Koran has begun, and it's not even accepted in universities.
@@SheikhN-bible-syndromeInvited?? In 1924?? Who invited the Quran to join the document party in 1924? Hahaha...
If you mean that literary criticism of the Quran was only INVENTED IN 1924, that makes a little more sense.
@@ColinWrubleski-eq5sh the 1924 Cairo Qur'an was made as standard in... 1924. That's what he means.
Destroying other lives while having zero disregard for their own b/c they are literal anti-humanity baby factories moment
Currently at 20:06 and I just realized that Jesus, who is described as God's firstborn, died on Passover like the firstborns of Egypt.
Just a nugget of intertextuality I wanted to share.
Edit: grammar
Yep. The entire Passover narrative and festival was a foreshadowing of Jesus.
Wow this is A+ content. I'm really impressed. When I first watched Baker's video I just took evrrything he said for granted without really considering the theological issues it posed. I can't thank you enough for making scholarly information like this available in a condensed format. I definitely haven't devoted as much time to this topic. Thank you as well for making your points sound and easy to follow. Really seems like Baker's pesach debacle is a big ol' nothing burger.
Have you considered tackling the Olivet Discourse?
Thanks, perhaps someday. Inspiring Philosophy is covering the "Jesus was a failed eschatological prophet" subject at the moment, I'll be interested in seeing more of what he has to say before I decide to weigh in.
you do realise that none of his arguments are well accepted views? he picks one author that supports his stance but bakers views are not his own but established multidisciplinary views. In a official well moderated debate, what this guy has would be laughed at. Stop watching videos and do the research yourself.
@@alanj3586Having the majority view doesn't make it the right view. Stop being disingenuous and assuming nobody researches before or after watching the video, you're probably projecting.
@@alanj3586He literally cites scholars in his videos.
@@alanj3586I think one thing he’s trying to do is point out blind spots and assumptions/presuppositions that are prevalent in the scholarship, of which there are many.
The useful charts guy claims to he a Jewish believer, yet he calls Moses a myth and considers him fiction… the guy is confusing himself.
Are you talking about the one that says he was raised an Armstrongist?
Yeah it's confusing, he also doesn't say the name of Yahweh
I'm sure someone has said this already but the statement about the passover being a "high day" I believe refers to it being an additional sabbath. If passover fell in a Saturday then the passover sabbath and regular sabbath were celebrated together. If say the passover fell on a Friday, you would have two sabbath that week hence the term "high day" to distinguish it from the standard sabbath.
For those interested, the Law is found in Leviticus 23:4-8 (ESV): These are the appointed feasts of the Lord, the holy convocations, which you shall proclaim at the time appointed for them. 5 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at twilight, is the Lord’s Passover. 6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the Lord; for seven days you shall eat unleavened bread. 7 On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall not do any ordinary work. 8 But you shall present a food offering to the Lord for seven days. On the seventh day is a holy convocation; you shall not do any ordinary work.”
Thank you for responding to that video. May God bless you!
A guy tried to cite a Wikipedia article, that was obviously biased, that supposedly proved that the gospels are unreliable. Goes to show how far their arguments go.
There are not “52 sabbaths” in a year. There are also a few “Great Sabbaths” which do not necessarily fall on Saturdays. They occur at “high holidays”, one of which is the First Day of Passover. The “day of Preparation for the Passover,” which, believe me (Through marriage, I have tons of Jewish and Israeli relatives, mostly Mizrachi/Sephardic) can can occur on any day of the week, depending on the year, then as now, and involves EXTRA preparation relative to a weekly Sabbath, because of special ingredients and housecleaning and disposing of all “chametz,” (leaven, i.e., every single crumb in the house). Also, “THIS” Passover may not refer to the moment, for example, you may go visit your cousin in Minnesota for Christmas and arrive on the 23rd of December and exclaim “…I really have looked forward to spending THIS Christmas with you!” Possibly Jesus was referring to the season, INCLUDING THE greatest possible holiday of all time, RESURRECTION, rather than the Passover Seder meal. After all it WOULD NOT BE THE “LAST Supper” WITH THEM. So to me, I have to consider the crucifixion May well have occurred on a Thursday Preparation Day which also aligns with “3 days and 3 nights” in the tomb.
Amazing video once again Erik. God Bless you.
Excellent analysis of John's gospel. Baker provides excellent charts and overview in his presentation, but sadly, at times he resorts to shoddy scholarship in order to give a backhand to Christianity.
I have never understood skeptics thinking Jesus died on 2 different dates, nor Christian's arguing there are 2 calanders. If you would be ritually pure by the evening meal then it can't be that they are worried about, it has to be a different meal. This is a case of not reading the whole Bible and just sort of assuming you know what is going on when you clearly don't. It is something I have come to expect from most skeptics and I am really heartbroken about.
I see you prefer the early (31 AD) date for Jesus' crucifixion, but have you considered the earthquake that happened in the region around 33 AD as shown by the geological record?
I'd say 30 AD and no I haven't looked into it but I'd be willing to. However, I think the statement in John 2 pretty much makes the date fairly solid, IMO. When it comes to geological data or what have you, I think we need to be a little careful.
I’ve seen that report, and as glad as I am to see the truth, the report about the earthquake is derived from biblical sources, which means, that the date was also determined by biblical sources..not from others reporting on it in non-biblical sources..so we are kind of back to square one.
Correct me if I’m wrong please…but the “wisdom” is, that since Jesus was crucified in April, and he was 33 years old, and the calendar reset at his birthday…then the earthquake reported in the gospels, had to be in April, 33AD
I think it’s folly to get wrapped in to such pedantic dates, when close enough is good enough, calendars change..heck, it used to be 12 months of 30 days each…The Julian calendar(used during Christs time) got replaced with our modern Gregorian…so…trying to get exact dates, is very hard, and honestly, close enough is good enough..don’t ya think
@@TestifyApologetics Luke 3 gives a pretty strong chronological time stamp. Tiberius’s 15th year was 29 AD.
@@TestifyApologetics I feel I should qualify what I said. I looked at as many Roman sources as I could regarding the 15th year of Tiberius, and they all agree that 29 AD = 15th year. They cite the years of consuls who were in power during the 15th year, and the record shows that the those consuls ruled in 29.
Yes i saw somewhere that at 3rd april 33ad, there was a partial eclipse and an earthquake
I haven't watched this but anyone who wants to know more about this should read the chapter The Date of The Last Supper in Dr. Brant Pitre's work "Jesus and the Last Supper"
I love Dr. Pitre's work, which date does he settle on? I have yet to read that book for myself, but I'm curious
Pitre advocates chronological harmony between John and Synoptics, placing Jesus’ crucifixion on Friday Nisan 15th. But if it’s a year-date you’re after, I believe he leaves that open for others to inquire about. He doesn’t commit to a particular year if I remember rightly… at least not in chapter 4 of his book where he tackles the chronology issue. If you want other scholars on the same page with Pitre’s view, Lydia McGrew in Eye of the Beholder, DA Carson in his John commentary, and I’ve heard Craig Blomberg agrees as well.
Carson opts for AD 30 crucifixion.
I'm glad for those variations, and undesigned coincidences in the Gospel accounts, it shows they didn't corroborate to 'get their stories straight' but represent independent testimony.
Well said
I don't think John 2:20 says the conversation took place after 46 years, it just says it took 46 years to build. The verb tense is an aorist, so that seems to suggest the construction was already finished by the time of speaking
Was about to comment this
I think it was still under construction/improvements and this lasted until its destruction in 70
The days before annual holy days are also called the day of preparation. The Passover is an 8 day Festival, starting on the 14th, which is the date of the first lamb's sacrifice in Egypt. The 15th was the date they left Egypt. The seven days of Unleavened bread go from the 15th to 21st. Day of Preparation is before the First Day of Unleavened Bread which is a Sabbath.
On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.
29:21 John not mentioning the dispute could be bc he was the host (as Jean Colson argued).
I think that the first cleansing of the Temple was just that: he was cleansing the Temple in preparation for his ministry. During Holy Week, he did not cleanse it again: the second time he came in judgement, because despite the hullabaloo of the Triumphal Entry, Israel hadn't really accepted him as who and what he was.
Dont you think someone would have been arrested if they "cleansed" the temple even once?
@@thuscomeguerriero Jesus already had a popular following, and some of what he protested would have annoyed the masses. There's a difference between what you can technically do and what you can actually get away with. The religious leaders liked to avoid controversy, and a public arrest might well have increased Jesus' popular support. When they did make a move, it was in secret, so they could present the masses with a fait accompli.
25:02 It's not a question of "two different calendars" it is a question of one calendar depending on when the newmoon of Nisan is observed.
There was not any preset calendar determining in advance how many days the previous Adar or second Adar had.
In France a few years ago, perhaps about ten years ago, Muslims in the West of the country and Muslims in the East of the country disagreed on what day Ramadan began, because Ramadan still works like any Jewish month, including Nisan, did then.
Caesaraea Philippi is further West than Jerusalem, so Our Lord can have observed the New moon one evening earlier than the Temple did.
This would by the way, along with how I found it in Nestle Aland, add up to John the Gospeller having been in Jerusalem, as a Cohen, rather than in Galilee, which is the thesis of Jean Colson.
18:51 It may be noted, Matt Baker is using a pre-determined Hebrew calendar. This has been the case since Hillel II. That's after Julian failed to restore the Temple, and the Sanhedrin was dissolved.
However, in Our Lord's day, the beginning of a month was by observation of the New Moon.
And, it may simply be, Our Lord observed the New Moon one evening earlier than the temple did, and as He was in Galilee, separated from the temple by Samaria, He relied on His observation.
St. John who says it was "the day of preparation of the Jews" usually as narrator uses "Jews" of the enemies of Jesus, even if Jesus when speaking uses it of His nation.
Ooops, it seems Nestle Aland does have "Jews" in 19:14, but not in genitive of parascheue ... either way, Pilate would be concerned with the date held by the Temple and the population of Jerusalem, which had mostly all of them been in Jerusalem at the beginning of Nisan.
Constructive Criticism: The lighting in your video makes the quality look poor.
Just my opinion.
I am working on getting better lighting and a higher quality camera. Just trying to make due with what I got in the meantime. It's frustrating to me too and I might try adjusting what I can
@@TestifyApologetics I like your videos. It just has bothered me everytime I see it that it looks like you are filming with the light off
@@TestifyApologetics Maybe it is just part of your style though because of the blue lighting
Thank you
Needs to be a year where the 2 sabbaths line up for Jesus 3 days. Which I think is 31ad or 33.. I can't remember for sure.
33 AD, I think.
I was surprised he concluded Jesus died on a Friday. There are people who think it may have been Wednesday or Thursday based on the three days and third day references. This would have been possible, because the first and last days of the Passover are types of Sabbaths, so he rose the morning after a normal sabbath, but he could have died on the day before the end of Passover. As you pointed out, they had dinner every night during Passover where unleavened bread was served, and lamb may or may not have been served on the different nights, and the time it was eaten affects which day it was.
I'm not suggesting I believe it wasn't Friday, but it's odd that a skeptic didn't bring this up, because they often do to point out the discrepancy in how long Jesus was in the tomb. Regardless, the gospel accounts let us know that the people all knew that Sunday was the day Jesus predicted to be raised, regardless of the cultural interpretation of his words. A common comparison people use today as an analogy is the term "next Sunday." That usually means the Sunday of the next week, but if you said it on a Monday, most people would assume you mean six days later, while saying it on a Saturday would mean eight days later. If we didn't know what day someone in say 1950 said next Sunday, but we knew everyone then meant a specific Sunday in 1950, then there's no contradiction just lost information about the day it was spoken.
Yeah I was a little surprised too.
It would seem to me that the concern with preparing for the Passover indicates that it was the ceder.
The priests and Pharisees would not want to be ceremonially unclean at any time during the feast of unleavened bread. Every meal that week was special, at least by not including yeast. The Pharisees were known for making up their own rules. Jesus repeatedly rebuked them for it. They undoubtedly had extra rules and regulations for Passover. We don't know all of them.
The feast of unleavened bread was eight days with special solemn festivals the first and eighth days.
I have seen a report that the Jewish calendar was disrupted because the Romans would not allow the necessary observation.
Jesus celebrated the feast of unleavened bread according to the essene calendar which always fall on a Tuesday. that was 11th of Nisan in the jewish calendar. he died on the 14th of Nisan 33AD according to the jewish calendar. mark was Essene scribe and recounted and narrates according to essene sensibilities. John narrates according to jewish custom. this so-called contradiction wasn't refuted until the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls and other archeological finds that happened and analyzed in the 20th and 21st century. this only goes to show the reliability of the gospels. I doubt they wrote with theology in mind. just a slavish narration of events
The Pharisees asked for a Sign, Yeshua said " You wicked & Adulterous Generation ask for a sign, None will be Given but the Sign of Jonah. Just Jonah was in the Belly of the fish for 3days & 3nights so shall the Son of Man be in the Belly of the Earth for 3days & 3nights". .....i believe Yeshua Died Good Friday & Rose on the (Saturday Night) Sunday Morning...But then that's only two Nights in the Grave 🤔 When Mary Magdalene saw Yeshua he said, "Do not cling to me as i have not Ascended to my Father yet" 🤔 *1Peter **3:18**-22* might give us a Glue where he spent the last night & Day , Releasing the Imprisoned Spirits from Noah's day 🕊🕊🕊 *HEBREWS 1:5-14* 🕊🕊🕊 Shalom & Godbless
strawman argument@@markhorton3994
Tacitus was on some kind of special council for Romans and would have access to direct sources. Look it up. Can't think if the name. But odds are he had records about all executions under Pontius Pilate and controversies such as the one found in the Gospel.
@@jacoblee5796 Yes he does, in his Annals 15.44
@@jacoblee5796 People are not saying he’s an eyewitness, nor even a Christian lol.
The case is simply that Tacitus simply is another source that confirms Pontius Pilate the Roman general was the one who executed Jesus.
The fact that he’s not a Christian in fact yet he’s not arguing over the historicity of the event points to it actually being something that occurred.
The claim isn’t that Tacitus proves the resurrection or Christianity . Like Testify said in this video it only is a problem when Christians try to overstate the case.
@@jacoblee5796 I'll try to find it my guy but it was like an Order or some kind of Committee Tacitus was on that likely gave him access to all the records he needed to write his history. Including execution logs and incidents of notoriety as recorded in the Gospel.
@@jacoblee5796 30 separate instances in the Annals where Tacitus is careful to substantiate a statement or distance himself from a claim or report about which he was less than certain -C.W. Mendell, Tacitus: The Man and his Work, 1957, p. 205
No. Tacitus was extremely careful to remove history from hearsay. This objection that Tacitus only repeated hearsay, is nothing but a coping mechanism for mythicists...
@@jacoblee5796
If you already knew that Tacitus only repeats what Christians asserted why did you even ask if he mentions Jesus?
And this hypothesis is just very dubious and unlikely because Tacitus was the top number one official historian of the entire Roman Empire. He had access to libraries and official records
This might be one of my favorite videos of yours!
In regards to John's account of the crucifixion, how do you understand the messianic fulfillment of Ps 34:20? It feels taken wildly out of context, or not very prophetic. Even as typology it's kinda odd
As far as I remember, John doesn't cite specifically to Psalms there. I think it's more likely a reference to the prohibition in the Mosaic law against breaking a bone of the passover lamb (e.g., Ex 12:46).
Bible editions have different cross-references, and that cross-reference may be less "this is the verse John is citing", and more "here is a verse about a comparable subject".
In any case, "fulfilled" doesn't have to mean prophetic fulfillment but can just mean "this event in Jesus's life gives a deeper meaning to this Old Testament verse. God's promise that not one bone will be broken applies to all righteous people, but it was fulfilled in a singular way in Jesus's death.
Jesus said all of the scriptures testify of him. So we can find hints of him throughout. God orchestrated many events of David’s life to parallel and foreshadow Jesus. So David says “a righteous man’s bones are not broken.” Who was more righteous than Jesus?
David also wrote Psalm 22, which is an even closer parallel of the crucifixion. Jesus quoted it on the cross.
Also, as Jonathancast points out, Jesus fulfilled the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. God gave those instructions to the Israelites as a foreshadowing of Jesus.
I've heard and read each side of these arguments, and questions of
Whether or not the Biblical accounts are cohesive. WELL, it makes
ABSOLUTE SENSE that Spiritual Matters would be too Complex for
us PEA-BRAIN human beings! As I take in the WHOLE PICTURE, I
See MORE than enough evidence that the Bible is the MOST UNIQUE
BOOK on the Planet-----The WORD of GOD!
AND;
Everything concerning Christ, SMACKS of the TRUTH!
BOTTOM LINE;
Salvation is for those who TRUST GOD, and Jesus Christ, the "SON" of
GOD.
this is the second worst way to convince anyone to convert, repent and be baptized. The worst way is violence.
probably your pea brain cant understand what literary criticism is
Know what’s funny, Baker made several mistakes..that I caught..the angels at the tomb listed in John being listed as zero..when it was a actually 2…and he misspelled unleavened bread..he spelled it unleaven bread 18:41
Easily overlooked and they don’t take one thing away from his presentation of the facts that he presented..I dunno, just seems like a double standard, judging the Bible by one and himself and others by another
Thanks so much for all your hard work in presenting these videos. All the little nuances you present bolster my somewhat weak faith. I am addicted to watching your videos. By your comparing the different scriptural accounts I get a fuller picture of what is going on. It’s almost like I should feel guilty for enjoying the Bible when in the past reading it often felt like a chore.
2 things. Day of preparation is modified because in this case it is preparation for the Passover, not preparation for the Shabbas. Not necessarily Friday. Second, and I honestly forget the source , but Jewish historians have said that because of the two calendars argument is a factual one, and the Priests would have taken advantage of the income available in serving two days of the Seder.
Mark 14:12 - the disciples obviously had been with Jesus in Galilee, so they would also have begun Nisan one day earlier than the temple, if my hypothesis is correct.
Jesus died on Thursday i.e after Passover meal i.e on Nisan 15th
After watching this the thing that still makes me the most angry is the complete and total denial of the impact of Christ on history and the creation of our current calendar by Pope Gregory. BC AND AD! DRIVES ME NUTS! 😤
Can you do a video on the old testament genealogies if you haven't already. Apparently they don't make sense but I don't know. I kind of just skip over them a bit... ?
It's important to note that Jesus wasn't protesting a corrupt system. The money changers are literally required by the law. Jesus was saying that Zechariah's prophecy that they would no longer need them was coming true.
What about arguments that the crucifixion was on Wednesday (or Thursday) and that another type of "sabbath" was meant?
If the Passover was that evening as the video claims, then the leaders would be unclean until evening and at sunset they would be fine, and thus be able to eat the meal. So even if there was a different chronology in John the verse makes no sense in the Jewish context as the uncleanliness lasts until the sundown of that day and thus they would be clean again to eat the passover eaten at after sundown. So the meal must refer to one eaten before sundown. So it seems the chronology presented here makes sense.
The crucifixion was on Friday, March 20, 33 AD.
In "The crucifixion of the King of Glory" dr Eugenia Scarvelis Constantinou gives a description of the procedures surrounding the sacrifices of the day of preparation, based on the Mishna Pesachim 5. The sacrifices started at 3 pm at the blast of the shofar horn, but were so plentiful that there was three consecutive groups as the many thousands of people with their families lambs could not fit in the temple all at once even if they used the outer yards to make room for more people. Priests were passing the cups with blood to each other in a long line so it could be poured over the altar. The entire temple courtyard was washed down between groups to remove the blood filling up the gutters. This was an industrial scale operation and it lasted some time.
Another, less gruesome, factoid dr Scarvelis Constantinou mentions is that after the sacrificial slaughter each family took the lamb home to cook it in a very special way. The lamb was roasted in an oven built for the occasion and used only once. The ovens were dome shaped as the lamb was to be roasted in a standing position, held that way by a skewer going from the rear all the way to the head, Another wooden skewer was inserted across its back spreading the front legs. The lamb looked like it had been crucified.
John the baptist called it correctly: "“Behold, the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world!"
The custom of eating lambs at passover stopped at 70AD.
Regarding when John's gospel was written, many people assert a pre-70AD writing of the text because of the lack of mention of the destruction of the temple. Is that any arguments to be made for an early dating that don't argue from silence?
One thing I like about this guy is that he makes it clear that there is a lot of room in how to look at the bible. No inerrant. Troublesome and mixed messages. And revelations to many Christians who follow that they believed only because they never made any intention to look into the truth on their own. By the way, most scholars do agree that a man named Jesus or some messianic/apocalyptic figure lived. But the bible, both the OT and NT, clearly reveal that he was a failed figure as so many existed back then and since then.
Is TH-cam automatically removing my comments here?
If you're leaving links it might but I see this one.
@@TestifyApologetics there's a really good Hebrew calendar link. How would I send it to you?
Hey Eric, what do you think about the arguments of Jeffrey Tripp against the eyewitness argument from Richard Bauckham?
the apostles ask where he would eat the passover diner as it needed some time to prepare, but Iesus tells them to eat it before the feast starts thus he consumes leavened bread. The problem arises from catholics who moved away from consuming artos leavened bread in eucharist and consume unleavened like the jews. Now how a priest explains it ( and I agree) is that the jews counted the day before passover 14 nissan as the first day of the feast which lasted 8 days including the official 7 days. Now while the day was a regular day and both the evening and the morning they would eat regular meals, they would have to remove on 14 Nissan all the leavened bread from the home , sacrifice the lambs, clean and do other preparations. So there is no contradiction just a misunderstanding from the catholics and english speaking people in general. In the greek version you have a different term for the holiday which is called feast of uleavened read and the name of the bread in the diner which is leavened. Also notice that the apostles do not eat lamb and sour herbs but bread, some sort of soup and wine. This explains both the reason why the judge releases the convinct on that day and many other issues. Also as a note regarding ritual cleansing yes it could be done fast but consider how tired everyone was with the preparations.
🔥
Thanks so much!
18:01 _"which every Jew knows means the day before Saturday"_
Not in the context of Pesakh. _Then_ it means the day after Sunset of which the Pesakh begins with the Seder.
I may have been a bit hasty on this one.
The best way to see what day Jesus dies is to go to the old testament and look at the dates of the feasts. Passover, unleavened bread, and first fruits. The passover meal is done on Nisan 14 at evening by the people at their homes. The priests sacrifice the lambs on Nisan 14 during the day. There are 2 sabbaths before the resurrection. The first sabbath is a high sabbath which is for the unleavened bread feast and then the regular sabbath. Jesus would have died on Thursday and thus giving us 3 days and 3 nights before the resurrection.
16:47 I must say I do not find it very likely that someone would neglect to mention multiple angels and instead specifically talk about there being a singular angel, as in Mathew and Mark. Because one angle is a miracle, multiple are literally many simultaneous miracles standing before you, this scenario would be more like your two daughters had come back from the park and one says "There were two dogs with human faces at the park" while the other says "There was a dog with a human face at the park."
One of your daughters is incorrect.
However, I also believe this neglect and the analogy itself, comparing the genuis of the biblical authors to your daughters to brush aside apparent factual conflicts, is rather at odds with your previous point that the authors of the Gospels are masterful, detail oriented historians, which I wholeheartedly agree with.
you are like an angel of the Lord erik. please make more vidoes like this. YHWH bless your ministry
Amazing video, can someone give me the Josephus reference?
“As this happened at the time when the feast of unleavened bread was celebrated, which we call the Passover…” Josephus, Antiquities 14.21
“As the Jews were celebrating the feast of unleavened bread, which we call the Passover…” Josephus, Antiquities 18.29
“And, indeed, at the feast of unleavened bread, which was now at hand, and is by the Jews called the Passover…” Josephus, Wars 2.10
@@TestifyApologetics Thanks so much, keep up the good work! May God bless you in the name of our Savior!
So what year did Jesus die and how old was He if He was born in 4 BC?
@@billyhw5492 And how or why was it changed?
If you pay your rent on a Friday evening as the work week is ending and the bank is closing and you leave a check on the landlords desk knowing that the bank is closed till Monday and then early Monday morning you walk by the landlords desk and the check is still sitting on there desk so you grab it and put it in your pocket and start to walk away and the landlord says to you as your walking away "hey! that's my rent money" and you keep walking and turn and say "I already paid my rent " and the land lord says "it doesn't count unless I keep the check wise guy" .
Tell me who is right in this situation?
the landlord? or the tenant?
the date of crucifixion is definite as 14th of Nisan AD 33 because it was a full moon falling on a Friday and there was also a blood moon lunar eclipse as attested as being observed by the New Testament. Jesus died at 3pm just as the 2nd tamid (daily sheep offering in the temple) was being signaled to be offered by the trumpet of the temple. the Passover lamb cannot be slain before the signal of 2nd tamid nor can it be slain if it is cloudy (then it would have to wait till evening). do your math again. Jesus would have been baptized on Yom Kippur of 29 AD.
thanks to the Dead Sea scrolls, we now know that the last supper occurred on the prior Tuesday of that week, 11th of Nisan. that was the passover and feast of unleavened bread according to the Essenes. Mark was narrating his events according to his Essene calendar. from the evidence in the gospels, we know that Jesus and his disciples celebrated passover in the essene quarter because of the man carrying the jar of water. Jesus must have been arrested after 9pm of 11 Nisan and interrogated in the kangaroo court that same night by annas and the scribes, and imprisoned in his dungeon that you can still visit in Jerusalem. the formal trial before the Sanhedrin was on 12th of Nisan after the first trumpet at 9am. official work ends at 3pm at the second trumpet and he was either held again at the dungeon or holding cell by the Sanhedrin or sent to the praetorium (the palace complex of Herod the great - excavated by shimon gibson). the interrogation of Jesus by pilate and Herod antipas would have been on 13th of Nisan. Jesus was passed back and forth between the 2 palaces in front of each other.
pilate would have the final presentation of Jesus before the people on the western double gate to the palace. the act of clemency would have been a natural act to perform on a feast day in the eyes of pilate as it was a virtue in the roman religion as 'clementia', an act practiced by the emperor himself, and judges of the Roman Empire. Jesus would have been scourged in the southern barracks of the palace complex and exited the eastern or northern gates of the palace complex on His way to Golgotha (present location of the Holy Sepulcher) which is only an 8-15 minute walk away
Luke is a doctor. He's writing it from a doctor's lens👍🏻
Jesus ate Passover *early* because he would be "busy" on actual Passover. That much is obvious.
I love it when testify starts with the words "prominent skeptic"... I can see bart ehrman rolling his eyes hearing that while thinking "shoot testify is refering to me again"... 🤣🤣🤣
The Date of the Passover varies up to two weeks between the priests of Zadok at Temple Israel and the House of Phinehas, because the Israelites were divided , Samaria and Judea, and if Jesus traveled to Jerusalem, he could celebrate the Passover twice. If in Jerusalem the High Priest, noting the delay in the Full Moon , could hold off the arrival of Passover , a day or so since he had power to alter the Calendar and invoke a Holy Day by Proclamation . There were times when at war, Passover was delayed several months, that a legal holiday did not occur unless the High Priest gave a signal to the Trumpeters to blow the horns, A Special Day of Preparation could turn a Seven Day Passover Week into EIGHT DAYS or longer, while outside the Temple District, Jews would only have a seven day Passover, because there was no High Priest to incur a delay or abrogate the natural observation of the stars. So Time as Malleable, based on the power of a High Priest ,like Joshua in the Book of Joshua, who during a War with Adoni Zedek , held up his hands to the Sun and Moon and stopped the Biblical Clock so that the SABBATH DA"Y would not legally arrive until the war or battle was won. So Joshua held up his hands to the Sun and Moon over the Valley of Ajalon and time stood still, in the legal sense of observation. So the Sabbath and the Passover dates do not come naturally , the assertion of a Messiah Priest can delay the day and hour. So Jesus said "No man knows the day or hour, but only the Father" meaning that the issue of TIME is a legal declaration by whomever is the HIGH PRIEST OF TEMPLE ISRAEL who must signal the Angels to blow the Trumpets.
In the Passover Week when Jesus died , the High Priest added an EIGHTH DAY to the week, making Saturday occur twice, and making the stretch from Friday to Sunday a THREE DAY TRIP, instead of two days, as you might think. So Jesus died on the Sixth Day, Friday , but the Priest added a SPECIAL DAY OF PREPARATION because the Moon was not yet full and the alignment would be the Full Moon the Morning Star and the Easter Sunrise to come as the same evening and day, and that meant 72 hours passed from the time Jesus died to the moment of the Resurrection , THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS because the SEVENTH DAY SABBATH was extended by Temple Israel to repeat and be as two days instead of one, so the Full Moon could arrive to match the moment of the Morning Star and the Easter Spring Vernal Equinox Sunrise to align together and produce a day without darkness over Jerusalem. The Full Moon the Morning Star in the GAP and the EASTER SUNRISE made a day without Darkness over the Temple ISrael, and that was figured to be THE FIRST DAY OF CREATION in repetition and that is the moment of the RESURRECTION OF CHRIST,
The Catholic Faith is the TRUTH and all other information is wrought with a lack of knowledge of God's Law. Without Temple Israel the Jews would only observe a SEVEN DAY PASSOVER WEEK, but with Temple Israel the High Priest had the power to stop the CLOCK and prolong the Passover Week to make the Astronomical Calculation of Easter to match the FIRST DAY OF LIGHT OR CREATION So Jesus died on Friday or day six of a special EIGHT DAY PASSOVER, that made his rest in the tomb prolonged to THREE DAYS AND NIGHTS, 72 Hours. There is no error in what I wrote here, The Catholic Church has the accurate information to figure out the Special Day of Preparation , how it confuses you , because you are ignorant.
If Mark was written while yet the Temple stood, the days of the week in Jerusalem, were by the Priestly Rule of Thumb, but if the Gospel of John was written after the Temple fell then the Calendar Days were ruled by the Jews without the Temple and the days shifted . Passover was observed up to two weeks earlier if you lived in Northern Israel, which was divided apart from the Temple in Jerusalem so there was two TRADITIONS, one in Shiloh ( Samaria) and one Jerusalem, in Judea, a kingdom separate from Israel. So Jesus traveled back and forth from Jerusalem and Samaria and would often repeat the Liturgical Festivals based on a difference between Mount Gerizim and Zion . The Judahites and the Ephraimites warred for centuries, and to this day there are Priests of Samarai still varying their Calendar differently than the Jews in Jerusalem. But in Jerusalem the Priest of Temple Israel had declaratory power to alter the days of the week , making his RULE OF THUMB more powerful than mere astronomy in setting up a Calendar. That is why Mark which is written earlier may report the days of Passover differently than the reports used in the Gospel of John, because the TRADITION was altered by the end of the Temple in Jerusalem, and without guidance you think there is a contradiction only you discovered, which is your own fault that you did not ask the right questions.
The Resurrection accounts from Mathew and John seem to contradict each other. Mark claims an Angel is seated on the stone covering the tomb (which had been rolled over), while John claims that 2 Angels are seated inside the tomb where Jesus was laid. Can you make a video looking into this?
In Mark, the Angel isn't sitting on the stone. It's implied the Angel has moved it and is sitting inside.
Matthew has the Angel sitting on the stone and then they all go in to the tomb. Luke has two angels in the tomb. All four accounts agree there is at least one Angel in the tomb who speaks. Two accounts say a second Angel which is an extra detail.
@@margaretrutherford5548 Mathew's account only makes note of one angel sitting on the stone, doesn't mention another angel.
Luke's account describes 2 angels in the tomb.
John's account describes two angels in the tomb.
.
Another difference in the accounts is what the angels say to Mary, and the other women.
This was a great video. Also, I look forward to a future video defending Papias' reliability, especially against Bart Ehrman. His objection to Papias' witness to Mark is desperate, and hilariously dumb. I also think a video defending the use of the term 'logia' to be a reference to scripture, and not to a sayings gospel would be nice, if you got the chance. I believe J.B. Lightfoot wrote an excellent essay on this topic a while back.
@TestifyApologetics what does it mean in 1 Corinthians 15:45 when it said the last Adam (Jesus) a quickening spirit? Is this an allegory for Christ being the only way to heaven, because I know as a fact christ didn't come back as a spirit but as a physical ressurected being
Quickening is just an obsolete word for life-giving. If you read the verse in context, 1 Corinthians 15:44 talks about our resurrection bodies being spiritual, so Paul clearly isn't using the word spiritual to mean non-physical - since the whole concept of resurrection is about physical bodies. In that verse Paul isn't using allegory, he's simply saying that resurrection bodies aren't going to be the same as the bodies we have now. So in verse 45 he's contrasting Adam's role of becoming a living being with Christ's role of giving eternal life to the saints. He's not using allegory, he's just using terms that aren't immediately obvious to most 21st century Westerners.
@Stephen Gray thanks for the reply 👍
Anyone using the terms CE loses credibility.
Good job!!
Good stuff as usual, Erik. I do want to add this because I've written on the subject before. Given the reference to the 15th year of Tiberius, as well as the reference in John, Jesus's baptism is in either 28 or 29 with his first temple incident possibly being the next year (depending on what time of year that baptism happened). Here are some extracts from that thing I wrote:
Tiberius’s first year is typically linked to the time after Augustus’s death in August of 14 CE. Velleius Paterculus, one of the authors cited for Tiberius’s co-regency, nevertheless refers to “the past 16 years” in his summary of Tiberius’s reign near the end of his work that he wrote in 30 CE (Comp. Rom. Hist. 2.126). Likewise, Suetonius, the other author adduced for this purpose, clearly reckons Tiberius’s reign to have ended in his 23rd year in 37 CE (Tib. 73.1). Others who reckoned Tiberius’s years in this fashion include Josephus (J.W. 2.168, 180; cf. Ant. 18.224), Tacitus (Dial. 17; Ann. 6.51), Theophilus of Antioch (Autol. 3.27), Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 1.21), Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 8), Hippolytus of Rome (Chron.), Cassius Dio (Rom. Hist. 58.28.5-6; cf. 56.30.5), Eusebius (Chron. [both translations, meaning Jerome agrees]), and the Chronography of 354. (I cite other evidence too, but here I'm focusing on what will be more easily accessible.) As such, all sources converge, using their different systems somewhere in 14/15 CE.
Since Luke nowhere else indicates a divergent chronology, he is likely operating on a chronology that was generally assumed, including by Theophilus and anyone else in his audience. All these sources we have noted vary from each other in details, they come from a variety of areas, they rarely evince dependence on another source in this list for this information, and yet they agree with beginning Tiberius’s reign in either the year of or after Augustus’s death, rather than a few years prior, and this includes the two sources relied upon for the co-regency argument. We thus have cogent reasons for thinking that this chronological assumption of when Tiberius’s reign began was established early and shared widely from those early days. As we have noted already, there is much more significant variation of how long Augustus reigned, depending on if one counts from the death of Julius Caesar or the year thereafter (44/43 BCE), his victory at Actium (31 BCE), his conquest of Alexandria or the year thereafter (30/29 BCE), or his reception of the honorifics Augustus and Princeps from the Senate (27 BCE). By contrast, we see much less significant variation about the length of Tiberius’s reign and about when his reign began.
In terms of precision, a number of options are possible for one to consider the beginning of Tiberius’s reign. Alden Mosshammer summarizes the basic options well, “The first year of Tiberius could be backdated to 19 August AD 14 [from 17 September AD 14], to the Roman year beginning 1 January AD 14, postdated to 1 January AD 15, or synchronized with any of several civil calendars in the eastern empire that began in the fall.” It is not always clear when a given author is using one dating system as opposed to another, as Eusebius demonstrates that the same author could use different dating systems for different works, as he places Pilate’s installment as procurator to either the 12th (Hist. eccl. 1.9-10) or 13th (Chron. [both translations]) year of Tiberius, depending on which starting point he uses. But in both cases, the implied date of the 15th year of Tiberius is 28/29 CE. Jack Finegan shows how it is possible-based on the calendar, the use of an accession year or non-accession year system, and including the invalid co-regency system-to date the beginning of the 15th year as early as 26 and its end to as late as 30. But most likely, as John Meier demonstrates through his use of various calendars that Luke could have been assuming (Judean, Roman, or Antiochene/Syrian), the 15th year falls somewhere in the range of October of 27- December of 29 CE. All the cited methods overlap with the year 28 CE; the only question is if this was the start of Tiberius’s 15th year or the end of it. Given that Luke is most likely assuming a calendar his audience implicitly understands, and given Luke’s frequent references (especially in Acts) to Roman politics, it is most likely that his calendar for this purpose is Roman, which would eliminate any portion of 27 CE from consideration. That leaves us with the year in question being either 28 or 29 CE.
Further confirmation of these dates may appear in John 2:20, with its reference to it being 46 years since the temple’s construction at the first Passover of Jesus’s ministry. This work was completed in 19/18 BCE (Ant. 15.380-425). As there is only one celebration marking this construction (15.421-423), it is reasonable to think that both the temple itself and the enclosures were completed around the same time, and so there are not two potential dates to reckon from. This would place this Passover after Jesus’s baptism in either Nisan, 29 or Nisan, 30 CE. (The latter date is possible when taking into consideration that the year in the Jewish calendar at this time was often reckoned from Tishri to Tishri, rather than Nisan to Nisan.)
For more info and sources, check out the post here: krharriman.substack.com/p/when-was-jesus-born-part-10. Or you can see the whole series here: krharriman.substack.com/p/when-was-jesus-born-an-analysis-of.
there are three passovers mentioned in John's Gospel, so if Jesus was baptized in 29 he could not have died any earlier than AD 31...
There were two Jewish colanders at the time also. I believe the Essenes had on different than the Pharisees and Sadducees.
28:20 Your explanation is even better than mine, so, you have just about destroyed the idea behind Michael Caerularius' claim "Jesus must have used leavened breads" ...
I'm glad to be back in Catholicism, as revert from Orthodoxy!
but he did use leavened. Also the fact is not that relevant except for catholics since the bread is transformed into the body of Christ. I am sorry to hear you return to the catholic heresies
@@Ciprian-IonutPanait _"but he did use leavened."_
According to what?
@@hglundahl according to the gospels. In greek unlike english there are different words for leavened and unlevened bread. asumos for unleavened and artos for leaven. This was kept in some romance languages like romanian azime/lipie (as a note sometimes lipie is not used with the meaning of azime but is the correct meaning) versus paine but this is not present in english. In the gospels it says as the first day of the asumos was coming the disciples asked Iesus where they would eat the Pascha.... And then he had thanked, broken the artos and said: This is my body... Basically the last supper had happened the evening between 13 and 14 Nissan. 14 Nissan was considered the first day of the feast because in the morning they would eat or remove all artos from the house and then prepare for the actual feast including cutting the lambs. As a note most would fast from the morning meal to the evening one in this day. Catholics go against this belief insisting on using asumos. While not a mistake from the first centuries christians tried to separate themselves from jews that did not accept Iesus when it came to the celebration of Passover, starting from the date, the usage of artos and so on.
@@Ciprian-IonutPanait _"asumos for unleavened and artos for leaven."_
Sorry, but:
"ho azymos artos" is unlevened bread
"ho zymotos artos" is leavened bread
Azymos and Zymotos are adjectives, and artos is the word for bread in both cases.
In the time of Caerularios, "ho azymos artos" was shortened to "ho azymos" so as to have "azymos" feel like a noun. He projected this late usage into the much earlier texts of the New Testament.
Your history of the last supper is mangled. Here is a quote from the Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 26:
*17 And on the first day of the Azymes, the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the pasch 18 But Jesus said: Go ye into the city to a certain man, and say to him: the master saith, My time is near at hand, with thee I make the pasch with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus appointed to them, and they prepared the pasch.*
This was obviously, at least to Jesus and His disciples, the 14th of Nisan. Preparing pasch = throwing out leavened bread to birds, and so on.
_"While not a mistake from the first centuries christians tried to separate themselves from jews that did not accept Iesus when it came to the celebration of Passover, starting from the date, the usage of artos and so on."_
It is probable that the use of zymotos artos came for the motive you mentioned, overriding what Jesus had actually done, and that in the region of the later Byzantine and Hierosolymite, perhaps also Antiochene patriarchies.
Alexandria and Rome, meanwhile, used azymos artos, which occasioned Caerularius to pretend the Latin usage was "a Jewish and Coptic/Monophysite heresy" ...
@@Ciprian-IonutPanait _"asumos for unleavened and artos for leaven."_
Sorry, but:
"ho azymos artos" is unlevened bread
"ho zymotos artos" is leavened bread
Azymos and Zymotos are adjectives, and artos is the word for bread in both cases.
In the time of Caerularios, "ho azymos artos" was shortened to "ho azymos" so as to have "azymos" feel like a noun. He projected this late usage into the much earlier texts of the New Testament.
Your history of the last supper is mangled. Here is a quote from the Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 26:
*17 And on the first day of the Azymes, the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the pasch 18 But Jesus said: Go ye into the city to a certain man, and say to him: the master saith, My time is near at hand, with thee I make the pasch with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus appointed to them, and they prepared the pasch.*
This was obviously, at least to Jesus and His disciples, the 14th of Nisan. Preparing pasch = throwing out leavened bread to birds, and so on.
_"While not a mistake from the first centuries christians tried to separate themselves from jews that did not accept Iesus when it came to the celebration of Passover, starting from the date, the usage of artos and so on."_
It is probable that the use of zymotos artos came for the motive you mentioned, overriding what Jesus had actually done, and that in the region of the later Byzantine and Hierosolymite, perhaps also Antiochene patriarchies.
Alexandria and Rome, meanwhile, used azymos artos, which occasioned Caerularius to pretend the Latin usage was "a Jewish and Coptic/Monophysite heresy" ...
You showed that both gospels agree that Jesus died on Nissan 15 but then you say that Jesus died April 3 33 ad on Nissan 14. I don’t get it
All who are given come to Christ. This is saving faith.
This means saving faith is the result of being given, not the grounds (foreseen or otherwise) of being given.
Jesus never cast out the one coming to him- those who come are those who have been given none else.
After the grumbling of the Jews Jesus explains their continued unbelief
No one has the capacity or ability to come to Christ in and of themselves. How many really believe this?
The Father must draw anyone for them to be capable of coming to the Son
On an unrelated note. Because I have attention issues I tend to listen to videos rather than watch them. Because of this, and because I watch Useful Charts every so often, at one point I got really confused and thought when he was speaking it was you and it really tripped me up. I mean, you don’t particularly sound that similar, but my brain Short circuited and I was spinning for a bit
I noticed that @6:21 you said “1st cleansing of the Temple”, how many cleansings do you think happened?
Two
Mark was a follower of Peter and Peter wasn't there.
And i always felt like Mark was a Speedrun of Matthew
I don't know why but your topics are quite interesting and make me wanna click it right away. But after like a minute or 2 I'm getting bored. Maybe because of your accent. Sometimes I have a hard time processing your words. Please speak slow and clear or at least add a subtitle. So that people like me who are not from English speaking countries can understand well as well. Thanks
I've tried commenting on this video with a linked to a Hebrew calendar conversion site so that you can look at where dates fell on the Hebrew calendar back in 27-36ad (among other years,) but both times I posted it my comment was errored out and deleted. Weird
TH-cam doesn't like people posting links. They think it's spam
@@agis230 that doesn't help when you want to link useful stuff in the comments. 😝
21:40 But Our Lord died c. 3pm. So, lambs were sacrificed.
No contradiction!
Tbf with the solar calendar argument that's not really a hoop. The essienes used the solar caledar as found in Enoch. Enoch was popular among early Christians, even being quoted by a brother of Jesus. Seems likely he DID use the solar Second Temple Period Jewish Calendar.
It also explains why the majority Jewish Apostolic Church would adopt the Roman Calendar and spread that.
Thoughts on Jesus dying on a Wednesday or Thursday instead of a Friday?
Justin Martyr say according church teaching christ died on Friday, and Irenaeus say christ died on the six day of the week
,
@@Triniforchrist how do you reconcile it with what Jesus said about the sign of Jonah, 3 days and 3 nights with a death on Friday?
@@shinryuken5423I think Jesus died on the Friday. I think people overlook there were two nights on the Friday. Luke 23:44 and Genesis 1:5.
This balances the two days, sun standing still Joshua 10
@Mark Talbot why does it need to balance out? I read the verses you posted, and I don't see how they would tie in to the crucifixion without reading too much into it. The sign of Jonah was the sign that would be given, and that was understood to be 3 days and 3 nights.
@@shinryuken5423 doesn't need to balance it out but God is a God of order so it 'fits'. No other way to describe the darkness at the crucifixion than as night.
This isn't a hill I'm going to die on, but in my mind the best explanation of the 3 days 3 nights
He lived, he died - general fact, what a joke...
Thank you, brother
It's actually somewhat comforting to get the sort of opposition offered by someone like Baker, say - a chap who, to some degree at least, tries to be neutral when discussing the historicity of Jesus Christ
Kind regards Kim
Useful charts should read more ancient literature. The gospels don’t read anything like ancient fiction.
It should be noted that the Day of Preparation did not have to be a "Friday" or the day before THE Sabbath. There's a little known fact that important festival days were counted as Sabbath days as well and these could happen on differing days of the week one year to the next. There can also be Sabbath stacking. If a festival Sabbath occurs on the day before or after the weekly Sabbath then your Sabbath rest could go on for more than one consecutive day. Just something for us all to think about before we insist Jesus died on a Friday.
Seder is the 15th of Nisan. He died between Seder and Sabbath. So why would historians look for a year when 14 Nisan is on a Friday?
The Exodus narrative makes it clear that the 14th was the date of the Seder.
@@jamesajiduah2001 the lambs are killed at twighlight of the 14th day which means after preparation time to cook the meal doesn't actually begin til the 15th.
According to the gospels, it was the Jews that told Pontius Pilate to crucify Jesus. Pontius found Jesus innocent.
23:08 You are aware that the prophecy Our Lord fulfilled was a law by Moses about the passover lambs?
Numbers 9:12 has the closest correspondence.
It’s difficult to listen to him talk in that staggered manner
Yeshua Was Cruxified Friday 3rd April 33AD (14th Nissan Jewish Passover) the only day in the 1st Century there was an Earthquake in that Area also An Eclipse as Recorded in the Gospels
*Matthew 27:45-54 / Amos 8:9-11*
@@JRTIGER07 nailed it
Is this concept different than playing with the definitions. If you call the creator and sustainer of reality a "computer" and then name something else god you aren't discussing the same thing anymore.
Not operating as intended is obviously true of our universe though.
1:28 hope he accepts Jesus being buried in a tomb then.
Hmmm, well I think you are being too hard on Useful Charts. I think we need to watch his video in the light of being literature rather than trying to be historically accurate.
16:06 Sorry, the word "Friday" doesn't appear in the gospels. You infer this, obviously, from the next day being called a sabbath - but the trick is to account both the regular weekly sabbath and the special sabbath that was passover. Good studies exist online that make the case for Jesus being crucified on a Wednesday, dying around 3PM, being taken down and hastily buried between then and sundown (when passover commenced). Then being in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights, being resurrected Saturday evening, so that by the "first of the week", the women went very early to his tomb and found he was already risen (note: NOT that he just got up, or words to that effect).
In any event, your work is still very useful, in that, because you've pinned the year down to about a 3 year range, only one of those years will have had its Passover on Thursday. That should be enough to pinpoint the exact year.
👍
Your chart is completely wrong. The passover lamb is killed on the evening (before sunset) of nissan 14 and the passover meal is eaten in the home throughout the night wich is the start of nissan 15. Feast of unleavened bread starts on nissan 15. The first day and the seventh day of unleavened bread are special/high sabbaths. Jesus is crucified in the evening/towards the end of nissan 14 and his body is put in tomb by the time nissan 15 starts wich was a special sabbath. Jesus says he will be in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights just like jonah. On the first day of the week (nissan 18) the women go at sunrise to the tomb and jesus was already raised from the dead. Jesus body was in the tomb for three full days and three full nights. That does not work with a friday crucifiction, thats like 1 day and 2 nights
well yes and no. You consider 3 days as 3 24 hour days but jews considered part of a day as a day in certain cases , so you have part of friday, all saturday and part of sunday, so 3 days. And if you still want to scoff. When He died the darkness that fell on the earth for a few hours can be considered the start of a new day. Either way 3 days is correct
What do you think about about the 69 Week- Years of [Daniel 9:24-26] calculated in (483 historical Years or ca 476,4 biblical Years)
The starting point according to Daniel 9 is the order to restore Jerusalem and from then 62 + 7 Year-Years to the Messiah coming as king.
We know according to Nehem 2:1-8 the Order was given in 445 bc and from then the 476,4 years we come in the year 32 ( ther is no years 0 bc)
Very interesting proposal.
It also depends when in his year 476 when Daniel heard his prophetic vision .
And then we also have to factor when they celebrated New Years as it wasn’t inherently January 1sr like ours.
This could make April 7th 33 AD quite a plausible date that aligns with all the other data.
Like
Reply and thanks
@@TestifyApologetics thank you for such amazing videos
Why does bro always sound like the guys hes responding to 😂
27CE
The supposed contradiction goes away when you realize that Jesus died on a Wednesday and that there were two sabbaths that week. A basic study of the feast days will greatly help the truth seeker.
1:00 they again show Indian Jesus.