|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/24/2008 2:27:53 PM
|
|
|
bgwill3
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
Question:
The Synoptics clearly record that Jesus ate the Passover with his disciples (Matthew 26:17ff; Mark 14:12ff; Luke 22:7ff).
On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples said to Him, "Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?" (Mark 14:12, NASB, emphasis added)
John tells us that Jesus spent a great deal of time with his disciples, even that a meal was consumed, before his prayer at Gethsemane and his subsequent arrest, trial, and crucifixion. But John's timeline seems to indicate that his arrest and trial occurred before Passover meal was consumed:
"Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas into the Praetorium, and it was early; and they themselves did not enter into the Praetorium so that they would not be defiled, but might eat the Passover." (John 18:28)
"Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover..." (John 19:14)
So, did he eat the Passover with his disciples on the night he was betrayed, or was their meal that night something else?
Comparing his final meal before his death in all four gospels and the Passover per Exodus 12: In the prescription for Passover, we know that the children of Israel were instructed to eat with sandaled feet, girded loins, staff in hand, and to eat in haste. In the gospels, they are reclining, at the table, and bread and wine are the only things mentioned. Specifically, Jesus washed his disciples' feet (John 13), which definitely necessitates that they were not sandaled (at least one foot unshod).
I always thought that Jesus did eat Passover meal with his disciples, but that it was only one part of an extended time with his disciples, and that sometime after the traditional Passover there was the bread-and-wine scene that we find in the Synoptics and in Paul (1 Corinthians 11). But reading and studying the timeline in John for Jesus' final days, it seems like John indicates (implies might be a better word) that Jesus was crucified in the same timeframe that the Passover lamb was being slaughtered in the Temple. John's unique description, among the gospel writers, of Jesus as the "Lamb of God" at the opening of his gospel, is re-emphasized at the end of the gospel, to underline that Jesus himself has become our Passover.
Mark 14:42 says that Jesus was crucified on "the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath". John calls it "the day of preparation for the Passover" and states that the following day was a Sabbath. I realize that the first and last days of the Feast of Unleavened bread were to be considered as Sabbath (Numbers 28:18, 25). Mark tells us that Jesus and his disciples communed in the upper room on the first day of the Feast. we know that the feast days were reckoned from sunset to sunset. So it would seem that the night of the Gethsemane betrayal was during the first feast day (being post-sunset), and that Jesus was crucified the following afternoon, still within the 24 hr period of the first day of the Feast. The Sabbath (whether it was a Saturday Sabbath or a feast-day Sabbath on some other weekday) commenced at sunset, shortly after Jesus died and was buried. But John has the day of crucifixion as the day of preparation for the Passover; wouldn't that be the day before and leading up to the first day of the Feast?
As you can see, my thinking has become a bit convoluted here. Let me know.
_____________________________
Brian
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/24/2008 3:52:26 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1166
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
There are two reasons for this. First, some postulate that because there were so many lambs to sacrifice on that day, observance of Pesach a day early was permitted. A second, and more likely reason, is that the Pharsees and the Sadducees interpreted the Pesach command differently. One group interpreted it as at evening. While the other interpreted it as between the evenings. Therefore, for political purposes, the Sadducees permitted the Pesach to be observed on both days. So, in my understanding, Yeshua observed the Pesach on the third day of the week(Tuesday) and was the Pesach on the fourth day of the week(Wednesday).
< Message edited by Bluethread -- 6/24/2008 3:59:48 PM >
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/24/2008 7:17:00 PM
|
|
|
robto
Posts: 104
Joined: 10/10/2006
Status: offline
|
bgwill3, the contradiction you point out has been much discussed by scholars, and there is little agreement on it. There are basically 4 possibilities:
1) Mark's chronology is the more accurate one. This is supported by the (pretty well agreed-on) conclusion that Mark was the first gospel written.
2) John's chronology is the more accurate one. This view is held by many scholars, I'm not remembering exactly why.
3) Neither chronology is correct. This is supported by the fact that some early Christians seem to have celebrated the crucifixion and the resurrection on the same day. This suggests that the actual chronology had been forgotten (and had to be re-invented by the gospel authors).
4) Both chronologies are correct. There are various ways of arguing this, some were given by Bluethread. Few scholars will argue for this type of harmonizing nowadays: it smacks too much of special pleading.
_____________________________
The Theory of Almost Everything: Everything you always wanted to know about elementary particles but were afraid to ask
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/24/2008 9:21:02 PM
|
|
|
Stephanos
Posts: 1129
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in KC MO
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: robto
bgwill3, the contradiction you point out has been much discussed by scholars, and there is little agreement on it. There are basically 4 possibilities:
1) Mark's chronology is the more accurate one. This is supported by the (pretty well agreed-on) conclusion that Mark was the first gospel written.
2) John's chronology is the more accurate one. This view is held by many scholars, I'm not remembering exactly why.
3) Neither chronology is correct. This is supported by the fact that some early Christians seem to have celebrated the crucifixion and the resurrection on the same day. This suggests that the actual chronology had been forgotten (and had to be re-invented by the gospel authors).
4) Both chronologies are correct. There are various ways of arguing this, some were given by Bluethread. Few scholars will argue for this type of harmonizing nowadays: it smacks too much of special pleading.
Well, since the word of God is inerrant, both chronologies MUST be correct. Since the Bible is the very Word of God, directly inspired by him, it would be impossible for a mistake like two different chronologies to occur.
As such, the answer MUST lie in our understanding of the times and culture there at Jerusalem at the time just before Christ's death and resurrection.
BTW as to your point number three and "Re-invented" Need you be reminded that John and Matthew were both eye witnesses to the life of Christ Jesus. Mark was a cousin to Barnabas and probably had Peter as his primary source of information (after and through God of course). And Luke was in the inner circle of Pauls close friends, so he too easily would have had access to direct information regarding what happened. This is all of course assuming you dont follow some of the heretic crowd who say that the gospels were not written until the 2nd or 3rd centuries (or later).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/24/2008 9:59:25 PM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 1807
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
Wednesday, Nisan 14 was the day of preparation when Christ was crucified, the next day; Thursday was Passover which was a High Sabbath.
The Passover meal with Christ in the upper room occurred after sunset on Tuesday on Nisan 13th. .
We pretty well hashed this out sometime back on Crosswalk with pretty broad consensus.
Here is a sequence of events:
Tuesday: Jesus Christ ate an early-evening Passover meal with His disciples (at the beginning of Nisan 14, Jewish reckoning) and instituted the New Covenant symbols (Matthew 26:26-28). Jesus was then betrayed by Judas, arrested and during the night brought before the high priest.
Wednesday: Jesus was crucified and died around 3 p.m. (Matthew 27:46-50). This was the preparation day for the annual, not weekly, Sabbath, which began that evening (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31). Jesus' body was placed in the tomb at twilight (Matthew 27:57-60).
Thursday: This was the high-day Sabbath, the first day of Unleavened Bread (John 19:31; Leviticus 23:4-7). It is described as the day after the Day of Preparation (Matthew 27:62).
Friday: The high-day Sabbath now past, the women bought and prepared spices for anointing Jesus' body before resting on the weekly Sabbath day, which began at sunset (Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56).
Saturday: The women rested on the weekly Sabbath, according to the Fourth Commandment (Luke 23:56; Exodus 20:8-11). Jesus rose around sunset, exactly three days and three nights (72 hours) after burial, fulfilling the sign of Jonah and authenticating Jesus' Messiahship.
Sunday: The women brought the prepared spices after sunset on the Sabbath (Luke 24:1; John 20:1). Jesus had already risen (Matthew 28:1-6; Mark 16:2-6; Luke 24:2-3; John 20:1). He did not rise on Sunday morning, but at sunset the day before.
Three days and nights in the tomb:
Wednesday 6 pm to Thursday 6 am = one night (high Sabbath)
Thursday 6 am to Thursday 6 pm = one day (24 hours) (high Sabbath)
Thursday 6 pm to Friday 6 am another night = 2 nights so far (ordinary Day)
Friday 6 am to Friday 6 pm another day = 2 days so far (48 hours) (ordinary Day)
Friday 6 pm to Saturday 6 am another night = 3 nights so far (Saturday Sabbath)
Saturday 6 am to Saturday 6 pm another day = 3 days (72 hours) (Saturday Sabbath)
No other combination gives 3 nights and 3 days, i. e. 72 hours.
Jesus resurrected during Saturday 6 pm to Sunday 6 am, or the night preceding Sunday, precise time unknown, but most likely it was Saturday at sunset (Mar 16:9).
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/24/2008 11:19:17 PM
|
|
|
bgwill3
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bob97
Wednesday, Nisan 14 was the day of preparation when Christ was crucified, the next day; Thursday was Passover which was a High Sabbath.
The Passover meal with Christ in the upper room occurred after sunset on Tuesday on Nisan 13th. .
We pretty well hashed this out sometime back on Crosswalk with pretty broad consensus.
Here is a sequence of events:
Tuesday: Jesus Christ ate an early-evening Passover meal with His disciples (at the beginning of Nisan 14, Jewish reckoning) and instituted the New Covenant symbols (Matthew 26:26-28). Jesus was then betrayed by Judas, arrested and during the night brought before the high priest.
Wednesday: Jesus was crucified and died around 3 p.m. (Matthew 27:46-50). This was the preparation day for the annual, not weekly, Sabbath, which began that evening (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31). Jesus' body was placed in the tomb at twilight (Matthew 27:57-60).
Thursday: This was the high-day Sabbath, the first day of Unleavened Bread (John 19:31; Leviticus 23:4-7). It is described as the day after the Day of Preparation (Matthew 27:62).
Friday: The high-day Sabbath now past, the women bought and prepared spices for anointing Jesus' body before resting on the weekly Sabbath day, which began at sunset (Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56).
Saturday: The women rested on the weekly Sabbath, according to the Fourth Commandment (Luke 23:56; Exodus 20:8-11). Jesus rose around sunset, exactly three days and three nights (72 hours) after burial, fulfilling the sign of Jonah and authenticating Jesus' Messiahship.
Sunday: The women brought the prepared spices after sunset on the Sabbath (Luke 24:1; John 20:1). Jesus had already risen (Matthew 28:1-6; Mark 16:2-6; Luke 24:2-3; John 20:1). He did not rise on Sunday morning, but at sunset the day before.
Three days and nights in the tomb:
Wednesday 6 pm to Thursday 6 am = one night (high Sabbath)
Thursday 6 am to Thursday 6 pm = one day (24 hours) (high Sabbath)
Thursday 6 pm to Friday 6 am another night = 2 nights so far (ordinary Day)
Friday 6 am to Friday 6 pm another day = 2 days so far (48 hours) (ordinary Day)
Friday 6 pm to Saturday 6 am another night = 3 nights so far (Saturday Sabbath)
Saturday 6 am to Saturday 6 pm another day = 3 days (72 hours) (Saturday Sabbath)
No other combination gives 3 nights and 3 days, i. e. 72 hours.
Jesus resurrected during Saturday 6 pm to Sunday 6 am, or the night preceding Sunday, precise time unknown, but most likely it was Saturday at sunset (Mar 16:9).
Bob
Thanks BlueThread, Bob, Stephanos, and Robto. One question, Bob, as to the Passover meal.
Jesus and his disciples ate Passover on 14 Nisan, which was Tuesday evening, after sunset. And Jesus was crucified less than 24 hrs later.
Was it customary to eat the Passover meal on the day before the first day of the Feast? If so, great. If not, why did Jesus eat it on this day versus eating it on the first day of the feast?
Also, how does this timeline, which you fold out, fit with Mark 14:12?
quote:
On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples said to Him, "Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?"
Clearly, you state that Thursday was the first day of the Feast, and you say that he was already in the tomb by then. But Mark indicates that he celebrated the Feast with his disciples on the first day of the Feast. So again, this is where my confusion comes in.
I believe that there must be a way in which these texts make sense together, since they are different accounts of the same events. If you and I wrote an account of the death of a contemporary, we may differ in details of his/her demise, and in our styles of delivery, but we know exactly when the person died, and it couldn't be one day for you and the next day for me. So there must be a way in which these seemingly different timelines agree. I am continuing in prayer and study of these passages.
BlueThread, your explanations seem reasonable. Seems like the only way that the timeline can make sense.
_____________________________
Brian
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/25/2008 12:03:31 AM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 1807
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
quote:
Was it customary to eat the Passover meal on the day before the first day of the Feast? If so, great. If not, why did Jesus eat it on this day versus eating it on the first day of the feast?
As I recall no, to eat the Passover meal at that time was not the custom but on the other hand Christ would be in the tomb before the accepted time for the meal wouldnt He.
The rules belonged to Christ so I guess He could do as He wanted. For example; travel was limited on the Sabbath but for everything to happen as scheduled on the Passover it was necessary for Christ to travel into Jerusalem from Bethany on the Sabbath, so He exceeded the allocated travel distance to do so.
_____________________________________
Mar 14:12 And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?
If the disciples ask the question after sundown on Tuesday, it would have been the day of preparation for the Passover, when the Passover lambs were killed. This was Wednesday and the Passover lambs died at the same time that Christ died
3 P.M. The day is called the first day of unleavened bread, not Passover Day.
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/25/2008 12:04:52 AM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 1807
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
I'm pulling this from memory bgwill...and my memory is very poor.
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/25/2008 10:44:07 AM
|
|
|
robto
Posts: 104
Joined: 10/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stephanos
Well, since the word of God is inerrant, both chronologies MUST be correct. Since the Bible is the very Word of God, directly inspired by him, it would be impossible for a mistake like two different chronologies to occur.
Most Biblical scholars would disagree with you. Most scholars, and I'm talking primarily Christian scholars here, are not inerrantists.
quote:
As such, the answer MUST lie in our understanding of the times and culture there at Jerusalem at the time just before Christ's death and resurrection.
In other words, rather than looking at what the Bible actually SAYS, you have determined beforehand to force your reading of it into a particular theological viewpoint, namely Biblical inerrancy.
quote:
BTW as to your point number three and "Re-invented" Need you be reminded that John and Matthew were both eye witnesses to the life of Christ Jesus.
Again, most scholars would disagree. The general conclusion of New Testament studies is that Mark was written first, and Matthew (and Luke) used a copy of Mark as a source for his own gospel. This makes it highly unlikely that Matthew (the gospel author) was a disciple of Jesus: If he was a disciple, then why did he need to use Mark as a source?
The case of John is more complicated, but again, most scholars have concluded that the gospel as we have it now was not written by an eyewitness.
quote:
Mark was a cousin to Barnabas and probably had Peter as his primary source of information (after and through God of course). And Luke was in the inner circle of Pauls close friends, so he too easily would have had access to direct information regarding what happened.
What makes you think so? How do you know any of this? What historical sources do you base these claims on? And how do you know those sources are reliable?
quote:
This is all of course assuming you dont follow some of the heretic crowd who say that the gospels were not written until the 2nd or 3rd centuries (or later).
Since numerous Christian writers at the end of the 2nd century mention the gospels by name and quote from them, it would be silly to argue for a 3rd century date. I don't know of any scholars who do so.
_____________________________
The Theory of Almost Everything: Everything you always wanted to know about elementary particles but were afraid to ask
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/25/2008 12:50:42 PM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 3975
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
Passover and Unleavened bread (matzah) are 2 seperate but related feasts. Passover is not a day but the sacrifice and the meal eaten starting at sundown on the 14th of Nissan which of course starts the 15th. Rabbinic (pharasaic) practice is to not eat leavened bread for some hours (most of the day) before the Passover seder. The only way that the disciples could have made adequate preperations and he could have died before the sabbath of Passover is to have the preps done on the 13th and the meal eaten at the start of the 14th, the evening before the slaughter of the lambs occured. Remember when Judas left to go to the priests one gospel said the disciples thought they might have needed more bread. Had Passover actually started, no merchants would be open to buy bread from.
_____________________________
Avatar is Saphira 5 months and Louvena at 23 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/25/2008 1:37:16 PM
|
|
|
Stephanos
Posts: 1129
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in KC MO
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: robto
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stephanos
Well, since the word of God is inerrant, both chronologies MUST be correct. Since the Bible is the very Word of God, directly inspired by him, it would be impossible for a mistake like two different chronologies to occur.
Most Biblical scholars would disagree with you. Most scholars, and I'm talking primarily Christian scholars here, are not inerrantists.
quote:
As such, the answer MUST lie in our understanding of the times and culture there at Jerusalem at the time just before Christ's death and resurrection.
In other words, rather than looking at what the Bible actually SAYS, you have determined beforehand to force your reading of it into a particular theological viewpoint, namely Biblical inerrancy.
quote:
BTW as to your point number three and "Re-invented" Need you be reminded that John and Matthew were both eye witnesses to the life of Christ Jesus.
Again, most scholars would disagree. The general conclusion of New Testament studies is that Mark was written first, and Matthew (and Luke) used a copy of Mark as a source for his own gospel. This makes it highly unlikely that Matthew (the gospel author) was a disciple of Jesus: If he was a disciple, then why did he need to use Mark as a source?
The case of John is more complicated, but again, most scholars have concluded that the gospel as we have it now was not written by an eyewitness.
quote:
Mark was a cousin to Barnabas and probably had Peter as his primary source of information (after and through God of course). And Luke was in the inner circle of Pauls close friends, so he too easily would have had access to direct information regarding what happened.
What makes you think so? How do you know any of this? What historical sources do you base these claims on? And how do you know those sources are reliable?
quote:
This is all of course assuming you dont follow some of the heretic crowd who say that the gospels were not written until the 2nd or 3rd centuries (or later).
Since numerous Christian writers at the end of the 2nd century mention the gospels by name and quote from them, it would be silly to argue for a 3rd century date. I don't know of any scholars who do so.
I dont want to turn this into a fight on inerrency. And seeing that I cant continue to contribute to this thread, as your argument is so full of holes, it would lead me to take it far off OP. Suffice to say that just because one is a "NT scholar" does not mean they are saved. Especially if they deny the divine influence of God on its writing.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/25/2008 3:50:11 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1166
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: robto
Most Biblical scholars would disagree with you. Most scholars, and I'm talking primarily Christian scholars here, are not inerrantists.
quote:
As such, the answer MUST lie in our understanding of the times and culture there at Jerusalem at the time just before Christ's death and resurrection.
In other words, rather than looking at what the Bible actually SAYS, you have determined beforehand to force your reading of it into a particular theological viewpoint, namely Biblical inerrancy.
If one must stick to what the bible says and not use cultural factors as a tool for understanding the Scriptures, then why refer to "Biblical scholars"? Shouldn't we just look "at what the Bible actually SAYS" in that case?
< Message edited by Bluethread -- 6/25/2008 3:56:18 PM >
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/25/2008 4:47:18 PM
|
|
|
bgwill3
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DaveW
Passover and Unleavened bread (matzah) are 2 seperate but related feasts. Passover is not a day but the sacrifice and the meal eaten starting at sundown on the 14th of Nissan which of course starts the 15th. Rabbinic (pharasaic) practice is to not eat leavened bread for some hours (most of the day) before the Passover seder. The only way that the disciples could have made adequate preperations and he could have died before the sabbath of Passover is to have the preps done on the 13th and the meal eaten at the start of the 14th, the evening before the slaughter of the lambs occured. Remember when Judas left to go to the priests one gospel said the disciples thought they might have needed more bread. Had Passover actually started, no merchants would be open to buy bread from.
Thanks Dave,
So in your opinion, what does the verse in Mark 14 mean?
On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples said to Him, "Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?" (Mark 14:12, NASB)
This seems to state definitively that they gathered in the upper room "on the first day of unleavened bread", or at least, they gathered pre-sunset on that day. Sunset on that day would mark the beginning of the first day of the Feast. Since that was a sabbath, it is conceivable that they were making preparations for the sabbath that would begin at sunset. If this is the case, then the Passover seder was to be taken on this evening at sunset. The verse states that the lamb "was being sacrificed" in the NASB; the AV has "And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover..."
Of course, John says that the next day was still the "preparation" day for Passover. Bluethread's reason seems feasible, that there was an extended "preparation" period, i.e. that he ate Passover with his disciples on the night he was betrayed, and he was the Passover lamb on the day he was crucified.
_____________________________
Brian
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/26/2008 6:27:50 AM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 3975
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
Thanks Dave,
So in your opinion, what does the verse in Mark 14 mean?
On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples said to Him, "Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?" (Mark 14:12, NASB) As someone has already pointed out, the numbers of people coming to Jerusalem with their lambs for Pesach made it impossible for them all to be sacrificed in one day. There was a custom that some came and had their seders early. I take it that the passage refers to the sacrifices that happened on 13 Nissan.
_____________________________
Avatar is Saphira 5 months and Louvena at 23 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/26/2008 9:42:48 AM
|
|
|
robto
Posts: 104
Joined: 10/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
ORIGINAL: robto
Most Biblical scholars would disagree with you. Most scholars, and I'm talking primarily Christian scholars here, are not inerrantists.
quote:
As such, the answer MUST lie in our understanding of the times and culture there at Jerusalem at the time just before Christ's death and resurrection.
In other words, rather than looking at what the Bible actually SAYS, you have determined beforehand to force your reading of it into a particular theological viewpoint, namely Biblical inerrancy.
If one must stick to what the bible says and not use cultural factors as a tool for understanding the Scriptures, then why refer to "Biblical scholars"? Shouldn't we just look "at what the Bible actually SAYS" in that case?
My complaint is not about using cultural factors as a tool for understanding the scriptures. Indeed, I think that if you want to understand what the NT authors intended to say, you MUST take into account the cultural milieu in which they wrote.
As for the NT scholars, if you want to understand what the Bible actually says, don't you think it makes sense to consider the opinions of those who have spent their lifetime studying the cultural context, the language, and the history of those books and their authors?
Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread either. I just wanted to point out that there are alternatives to "both versions MUST be right".
_____________________________
The Theory of Almost Everything: Everything you always wanted to know about elementary particles but were afraid to ask
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Synoptics v. John on the Last Supper/Passover - 6/26/2008 10:28:14 AM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 1807
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
quote:
Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread either. I just wanted to point out that there are alternatives to "both versions MUST be right".
Of course both verses are right, we just need to understand them in context of the complete story.
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
