You don't understand the Jewish customs in the OT. If you care to understand go to creationistWON and see ProfMth responded, now we will debunk him even more :) for a clear explanation and how your assertions are debunked. No contradictions.
The only time the term passover is mentioned while they were eating is Luke 22:15 "And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:"
And the next verse says Luke 22:16 "For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God."
Simply meaning, I will not be eating tomorrow. Jesus suffering "is" the passover, passover is more the time of and not the day of.
Could they have done it a day earlier? Well wasnt it Jesus who was yelled at for "working" on the Sabaath? Christ shows that he is greater than the law, sabaath, and even the temple. Moreover, there was Old Testament authority for changing the Passover time under appropriate circumstances. The feast could be observed on the 14th day of the second month (instead of the first) by those who had been away on a trip, or those who had been ceremonially unclean, at the regular time (Num. 9:9-12).
Then theres the possibility that John was using a different calender. The most natural reading of John shows Jesus as crucified at the very time the Passover victims were slain in the temple. While it is possible to interpret the evidence as to make both tell the same story it seems preferable to see them as following different calendars. According to the calendar Jesus was following, the meal was the Passover.
But the temple authorities followed another, according to which the sacrificial victims were slain the next day.
Also, pascha (passover) here could also be refering to the entire eight-day celebration, instead of one feast. And the meal mentioned in John 18.28 may have been in reference to the sacrificial meal that is eaten on the day following the passover.
Good, coherent video. Some people below seem unable to accept the contradiction. To simplfy the context to its "bare bones", I suggest getting them to read Luke 22:7-8, where Jesus clearly eats the Passover lamb. Then turn to John 18:28: "When Jesus was arrested, the Jews did not enter Pilate's judgment hall because they wanted to stay clean TO EAT THE PASSOVER". So, now they HADN'T already eaten it, right? That should be simple enough - people may be confused about the "Preparation day".
Passover here is meaning two, similar but different, Hebrew phrases that both constitute "Passover meals."
The first is that of Jesus - what we gentiles are more familiar with, the seder, bitter herb, cardboard flavored bread etc. It also happens to correspond with another Hebrew tradition that Jesus is probably using called the se'udat-mitzvah, a sort of celebratory feast upon the graduation of a Rabbi's students from a certain course of their study (ususally corresponding to a book they have..
just completed studying). What is referred to in John is another Passover meal, as much a part of Passover as the seder, though less known to we gentiles called the chagigah, a meal eaten the afternoon following the seder. Thus the time line - Jesus eats the seder (Passover) on Thursday night, goes to pray, is arrested, suffled here and there at various points in of the night and morning, they do not enter Pilate's palace in the morning because they would not be able to the chagigah (Passover)..
, Jesus is crucified, dies not long before sunset and so is rushed without proper burial to the free tomb given so as not to break the sabbath. They do not return after the sabbath because of dark/guards etc. thus returning on the morning after the sabbath (Sunday) and tada the Easter Bunny is born. Ok so maybe no bunny, but you get the gist.
First i dont think that those versus do. But i have had times in my life when i see something that i honestly think contradict. Then I Pray and they still contradict themselves. Finally I Say God I have faith in you and in your inspired word. I get on with my life, and what do you know a day, a week sometimes a year or years something happens in my life and im like "Come on God it couldn't have been that easy." and i understand.
So your technique is to ignore it long enough and....Yeah, once the details fade from memory any old explanation will do. I really love you people who claim that God eventually reveals the answers to you, but you are somehow incapable of sharing those answers with the rest of the world.
LOL...Details do not fade from something thats important enough to have you question your philosophy. Second Its written down in a book, Bible. Do you think before you comment? God will reveal answers to you also...you just have to listen...for crying out loud you couldn't even understand my simple statement.
The preparation day is preparing for the Sabbath. Not neccesarily for the passover. You will find that Jesus and His disciples ate the Last Supper on thursday night. So I see no reason why Jesus couldn't have eaten the meal. Unless I'm missing something.
Where does it suggest that He didn't eat? The closest thing it says was during the meal (I'm paraphrasing by the way) Jesus got up and washed their feet. It doesn't mention Him not eating. Unless I've missed something. I'll say it doesn't mention Him eating either but with the other 3 gospels you would assume He also ate.
Are you messing with me? Did you not watch the video at all? John depicts a last supper, but NOT the Passover meal. He says Jesus died on the preparation day. The disciples didn't go into the judgement hall because they HAD NOT yet eaten the passover. According to John, Jesus didn't eat the passover because he was DEAD on the passover. Watch it again before you ask more questions.
In the NIV version, which is clearer and easier to read it says the Jews didn't enter. It doesn't specify that it was the disciples. The other disciples had run of, Peter had run crying and the other one that is mentioned earlier is not even mentioned here. The when Jesus sent Judas out, and the disciples thought that Jesus sent him to buy things, you left out that part where its says, "or to give something to the poor."...
It doesn't matter which Jews it mentions, the point is they had not eaten the Passover because it was STILL the preparation day. John says Pilate turned Jesus over to be crucified on the preparation day and they took his dead body down on the preparation day. Read Luke 22:7-20. It says Jesus ate the Passover meal on the day of Passover. John says he was dead and buried on the day of Passover.
It does matter. Because here you talking about specific Jews. Preperation day is for the Sabbath. Not neccesarily Passover. And Biblically anyway, thursday night was the prepartion day. Technically friday. "The evening and the morning were the first day..." So Jesus ate and died on (Biblically) friday. Preperation day. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Read John 18:28 in your NIV. "to avoid ceremonial uncleanness the Jews did not enter the palace; they wanted to be able to eat the Passover" According to John this WAS CLEARLY the preparation day for the PASSOVER, not just some other sabbath. Keep pretending not to see it, it will make you no less wrong.
See what? This text doesn't even mention preperation. Tell me what I'm menat to see. In this text I don't see how Jesus or the disciples couldn't have eaten the Passover. Tell me
John repeatedly calls this day the preparation day. This text (John 18:28)makes it clear that it was the preparation day for the passover. All Jews were commanded to eat the passover at a specific time (see Nu 9:2-5) The jews didn't enter because it was the preparation day BEFORE the passover. They had not yet eaten the passover because the commanded time had not arrived yet. So if Jesus already ate it, he sinned.
...This is just after the confusion of who would betray Jesus, so they clearly weren't thinking straight. They had just eaten the Passover that night (Thursday night) Jesus and the disciples that is, as Luke 22 says. The Last supper was the Passover meal. Correct me if I'm wrong.
thanks for the vids,it is refreshing to see a fellow "atheist bible scholar",it's it ironic how those of us who have studied the bible and it's origins for so many years become atheist. The christians need to study more. i will look forward to more vids from you, thanks.
Belive none of what you hear and half of what you read.its a story there are some things in it we can use in life as there always is in any story book but most of it is just a STORY,if i could rewrite the dictonary there would be lots of speeling mistakes but when it came to desribing the bible i would write ,contradiction,if i could spell it.this religious shit will never change, i can see you would like it too.its just to big please find another quest for your own sake.regards
Even if you are correct why create contradictions you where none actually exist. Adkins says things like "if the disciples had already eaten the passover why would they want to eat the passover" and ignore the fact that the passover last of seven days. Then claim that if Christ had eaten the passover early he would not be the perfect lamb of God.2 Chr.30:2-5 gives a counter example to this. Luke 22:15 indicates the reason.
But it is also the case that the term pascha can refer to the entire eight-day period which included the feast of unleavened bread—thus from the 14th of Nisan to the 21st. Note this passage:
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, you shall observe the Passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten" (Ezek: 45:21; cf. Lk. 22:1, 7; Acts 12:3-4).
the Greek word for Passover is pascha. The term is used in three different senses in the Bible.
Sometimes the word stands for the Passover sacrifice, the lamb itself (Mk. 14:12; Lk. 22:7; 1 Cor. 5:7).
On other occasions pascha can denote the meal that was eaten on the 14th of Nisan, the first month of the Hebrew calendar (Mt. 26:18-19; Lk. 22:8, 13; Heb. 11:28).
Matur1n, you focused on that one word and DODGED everything else he said. Relisten to the 2:00-2:30 mark and realize that it doesn't matter WHICH meal you want to call it, there is STILL an error. There is much more in there...this was an extremely weak counterargument.
If Jesus ate the Passover on the day of preparation and was tried and crucified on that same day then John18:28 could be referring to the other six days of feast. It does not say in any of the Gospels that Lamb was served at the last Supper.Preparation day was from Tuesday Sunset to Wednesday sunset.
The Passover was eaten in Israeli a month after the normal time in 2 Chr.30:2-5. If this was not a sin then Jesus could have eaten the Passover a few hours before since he was going to become their Passover at the regular time.
QC, the Bible is the perfect word of God, right? He knows everything and even knew that we would have this conversation when he "wrote" the Bible, right?
The statement that God knows everything and is Omniscient is a figure of speech called a synecdoche, where all is used for a part. There are many scriptures that indicate that God sees, discovers gets to know some things as they occur. See (Gen 2:19; 18:21; 2Chr:12:7; Isa 59:15-16; Jonah 3:6). God knows his overall plan from beginning to end but not all the details about free will choices.
Even us dumb humans with our limited knowledge can be quite good at predicting statistical behavior. Statistical Mechanics works without knowing the behavior of individual particles.
Even though God is a personal,God does not need to know what choices each individual or even group will make in order to make HIS PLAN happen exactly like he wants.
ok, so you DO think that he WILL MAKE his PLAN work when needed...so...KNOWING that this verse would cause so much contraversy now, WHY DIDN'T HE make sure the writers of the Bible WROTE DOWN whichever of your hypothesized posibilities were true INSTEAD of having them write down the one that makes it look 100% like a complete and total contradiction?
The meaning becomes clear when you tie together all the scriptures together and find the one interpretation that makes all of them true. He ate the passover a little early and died on the preparation day. 2Chr30:2-5 makes it clear if there is a good reason the passover can be eaten at a different time than normal.
The meaning is now so clear after a little effort that I can not see another interpretation.Luke I believe makes it clear that the passover was prepared.The Supper in John refers to the meal of the first day of the passover which they ate a few hours early.John was trying to make the time of the crucifixion more clear than Luke or Matt. and did not refer to it as a passover.
I ENTIRELY disagree with you and STILL say you are making excuses to justify a contradiction that is OBVIOUS that you would state on anyone ELSE'S religion...just not your own!
Have you not observed me correcting Christians when they use stupid arguments about science. If a Christian were to claim a contradiction an another religion that was false I would not hesitate to correct the Christian.
Even Matt. and Luke need this interpretation to account for the full three days and nights that Jesus was in the heart of the earth. The next day after His death had to be the High Sabbath instead of the Weekly Sabbath.
while I agree that you are one of the MUCH more sensible of Christians that I've talked with here, I still say you are making concessions for your religion that you wouldn't do for someone else's. For example, (let's test the theory)...would you agree that the Quran is suggesting the world is flat when it says God "spread the Earth out like a carpet"?
I have to ask how would a Muslim respond to this? Earth could refer to the crust of the Earth that man travels on.A carpet can cover a surface of any shape.
Maybe from Allah's perspective a surface the size of a continent wasn't much more than a rug.Since I do not speak Arabic and am not a Muslim I am not really qualified as an Apologist of Islam.I need an accurate translation and context for how the Arabic word translated as Earth is used here.
no, what you mean is you are going to avoid the issue because you know it traps you. Bottom line is that on NUMEROUS occasions the Quran implies a flat Earth. So does your Bible. But I guess you proved me wrong, you'll make acceptions in your logic for ANY religion, not just Christianity.
I would be reluctant to claim a contradiction if there unless I was really sure no one could give a valid answer. You sure have a lot of faith that no one can come up with a valid explanation.
OH NO, don't play me that way. Take your 1 and 2, my conclusion is: ONE or BOTH of them is wrong. Time for more testing. I don't immediately write off both. The change could be due to an unseen variable, or one simply made a mistake, or they are both mistaken. Science isn't bound by "all or nothing"...
Your conclusion that one or both are wrong would be wrong.Light is a particle with a wave describing its behavior. Both experiments are correct although it seems counterintuitive. The Matthew Luke Linage is very simple to reconcile once you release how.
I really don't care in the instance which is right wrong or both or neither...my point was, I don't have a problem deciding something that is erroneous is as such. If you want to dance around the lineage (which wasn't what I was talking about) or whatever other contradiction you want to twist into a "plausible" but not "probable" truth...go ahead, I'm not buying. If it were as you said it was, then a "perfect god" would have made it say so.
I see. You were referring to the Census and King Herod and the time of Jesus Birth problem.You have a problem seeing that something is correct if it at first appears wrong,but not seeing something as wrong that really is.
Ex. Each gospel writer (supposedly) wrote their books independantly. So why DIDN'T Luke include the story of Herod? Why DIDN'T Matthew include the story of the census? Why DIDN'T one inlude the shepards and the other the magi?
How without taking away human freedom and free will would God have made it say so.God chooses not to exert that much determinism on being of free will.God made sure they had correct information but did not dictate how the writers wrote it. Maybe God is not perfect as you perceive perfect.
ok, I think I still have free will if he simple makes his story CLEAR. I can't think of a SINGLE book with more errors or contradictions than the Bible...if MAN can write a book with such clarity and precision...why couldn't God? Perfect? He's not even close.
If you tie it all together and find the interpretations that do not contradict then only numerical errors that even I cannot reconcile will remain. The actual meanings are still clear.
Even on the large scale you can be faced to reconcile too contradictory ideas. Astrophysicist used to have too theories of Galaxy formation.One that galaxies formed first then stars or that stars formed first. Currently coevolution of both seems to be currect.
Ok Newton 1692I did nothing to imply that quantum logic is required to solve this problem. I believe Jesus ate the Passover meal early in both Luke and John. John simply calls it Supper. Quantum Logic applied to this would allow a superposition of both eating and not eating the Passover. I said nothing as absurd as you imply.
Newton 1692 Google -A SUPERCONDUCTING "SCHRODINGER'S CAT" and see what you find. Here a large assembly of electrons are in a superposition of clockwise and counterclockwise motion.
No I suggested he was alive in both Matthew and Luke. It was also suggested that the first Census was when Quirinsus governed rather than was governor of Syria. This was earlier than the 6-9 C.E. census mentioned in Acts 5:37.
There is of course no contradiction but the principle of complementarity which there is copius evidence for. The science of physics and the science of history are different, since the source material in history is less controlable. The historian does not have the privilige of orginal datum (see:Cohen and Nagel, Logic and the Scientific method). I think that you are not making the distinction between historical science and physical science clear enough.
Two manuscripts that report the same event (For example :Did Caesar cross the Rubicon?) differently can not be held in the same regard as the Directly Observed phenomena which you mention here. History and Physics use the scientific method, that's what makes them scientific, but history has different constraints.
My working hypothesis is that the scriptures are not written independently. Most historical documents do not claim divine inspiration. It is this claim of divine inspiration that Wayne Atkins strives to refute. Time and time again I see that claims of contradiction are baseless and my confidence in scripture only increases.
Newton 1692 --Thanks for your replies. I agree that two documents reporting the same event cannot be held in the same regard as directly observed phenomena. I am sorry for not making that clear earlier. I was simply drawing a comparison in that the truth is more likely to be the interpretation that does not conflict if possible. So far as I have found that all so conflicts, except for numerical ones, disappear with a little bit of effort.
when I was in the middle part of my deconversion, neither was the Bible. I accepted the idea that maybe Matthew was right, but Luke was wrong. Maybe this prophesy was true but that one wasn't. It was a logical decision to make. Unfortunately for the church, it led to a new set of problems, but that's another story.
I'm curious Matur1n, why do you believe that the bible is true? Are there any other texts from that time that corroborate the stories of the bible? There's NO proof, and NO way to know anyway, unless you lived during that time...so realistically, you simply ASSUME the bible is true. Why assume? You know the saying that goes along with that word, don't you?
If Jesus are the Passover on the day of preparation and also died on that same day then in John 13:29 the disciples could have believed Jesus sent Judas to buy supplies for the next six days of feast.
Correction seven more days. All four Gospels could refer to the preparation day portion of the passover feast.I believe Matur1n has a very good point.
You don't understand the Jewish customs in the OT. If you care to understand go to creationistWON and see ProfMth responded, now we will debunk him even more :) for a clear explanation and how your assertions are debunked. No contradictions.
undertoww 2 years ago
The only time the term passover is mentioned while they were eating is Luke 22:15 "And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:"
And the next verse says Luke 22:16 "For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God."
Simply meaning, I will not be eating tomorrow. Jesus suffering "is" the passover, passover is more the time of and not the day of.
jazzyhap 2 years ago
Could they have done it a day earlier? Well wasnt it Jesus who was yelled at for "working" on the Sabaath? Christ shows that he is greater than the law, sabaath, and even the temple. Moreover, there was Old Testament authority for changing the Passover time under appropriate circumstances. The feast could be observed on the 14th day of the second month (instead of the first) by those who had been away on a trip, or those who had been ceremonially unclean, at the regular time (Num. 9:9-12).
Guffguy 3 years ago
Then theres the possibility that John was using a different calender. The most natural reading of John shows Jesus as crucified at the very time the Passover victims were slain in the temple. While it is possible to interpret the evidence as to make both tell the same story it seems preferable to see them as following different calendars. According to the calendar Jesus was following, the meal was the Passover.
Guffguy 3 years ago
But the temple authorities followed another, according to which the sacrificial victims were slain the next day.
Also, pascha (passover) here could also be refering to the entire eight-day celebration, instead of one feast. And the meal mentioned in John 18.28 may have been in reference to the sacrificial meal that is eaten on the day following the passover.
Guffguy 3 years ago
Good, coherent video. Some people below seem unable to accept the contradiction. To simplfy the context to its "bare bones", I suggest getting them to read Luke 22:7-8, where Jesus clearly eats the Passover lamb. Then turn to John 18:28: "When Jesus was arrested, the Jews did not enter Pilate's judgment hall because they wanted to stay clean TO EAT THE PASSOVER". So, now they HADN'T already eaten it, right? That should be simple enough - people may be confused about the "Preparation day".
psandbergnz 4 years ago
Passover here is meaning two, similar but different, Hebrew phrases that both constitute "Passover meals."
The first is that of Jesus - what we gentiles are more familiar with, the seder, bitter herb, cardboard flavored bread etc. It also happens to correspond with another Hebrew tradition that Jesus is probably using called the se'udat-mitzvah, a sort of celebratory feast upon the graduation of a Rabbi's students from a certain course of their study (ususally corresponding to a book they have..
professorflux 3 years ago
just completed studying). What is referred to in John is another Passover meal, as much a part of Passover as the seder, though less known to we gentiles called the chagigah, a meal eaten the afternoon following the seder. Thus the time line - Jesus eats the seder (Passover) on Thursday night, goes to pray, is arrested, suffled here and there at various points in of the night and morning, they do not enter Pilate's palace in the morning because they would not be able to the chagigah (Passover)..
professorflux 3 years ago
, Jesus is crucified, dies not long before sunset and so is rushed without proper burial to the free tomb given so as not to break the sabbath. They do not return after the sabbath because of dark/guards etc. thus returning on the morning after the sabbath (Sunday) and tada the Easter Bunny is born. Ok so maybe no bunny, but you get the gist.
professorflux 3 years ago
So sorry for the extra post - but you'll need to read to bottom to top on my posts.
professorflux 3 years ago
First i dont think that those versus do. But i have had times in my life when i see something that i honestly think contradict. Then I Pray and they still contradict themselves. Finally I Say God I have faith in you and in your inspired word. I get on with my life, and what do you know a day, a week sometimes a year or years something happens in my life and im like "Come on God it couldn't have been that easy." and i understand.
nomyturn 4 years ago
So your technique is to ignore it long enough and....Yeah, once the details fade from memory any old explanation will do. I really love you people who claim that God eventually reveals the answers to you, but you are somehow incapable of sharing those answers with the rest of the world.
wonderbread21727 4 years ago
LOL...Details do not fade from something thats important enough to have you question your philosophy. Second Its written down in a book, Bible. Do you think before you comment? God will reveal answers to you also...you just have to listen...for crying out loud you couldn't even understand my simple statement.
nomyturn 4 years ago
The preparation day is preparing for the Sabbath. Not neccesarily for the passover. You will find that Jesus and His disciples ate the Last Supper on thursday night. So I see no reason why Jesus couldn't have eaten the meal. Unless I'm missing something.
1LilKing 4 years ago
According to the other gospels he did eat the passover. The point is, according to John, he didn't. The gospels contradict each other.
tillnow67 4 years ago
Where does it suggest that He didn't eat? The closest thing it says was during the meal (I'm paraphrasing by the way) Jesus got up and washed their feet. It doesn't mention Him not eating. Unless I've missed something. I'll say it doesn't mention Him eating either but with the other 3 gospels you would assume He also ate.
1LilKing 4 years ago
Are you messing with me? Did you not watch the video at all? John depicts a last supper, but NOT the Passover meal. He says Jesus died on the preparation day. The disciples didn't go into the judgement hall because they HAD NOT yet eaten the passover. According to John, Jesus didn't eat the passover because he was DEAD on the passover. Watch it again before you ask more questions.
tillnow67 4 years ago
In the NIV version, which is clearer and easier to read it says the Jews didn't enter. It doesn't specify that it was the disciples. The other disciples had run of, Peter had run crying and the other one that is mentioned earlier is not even mentioned here. The when Jesus sent Judas out, and the disciples thought that Jesus sent him to buy things, you left out that part where its says, "or to give something to the poor."...
1LilKing 4 years ago
It doesn't matter which Jews it mentions, the point is they had not eaten the Passover because it was STILL the preparation day. John says Pilate turned Jesus over to be crucified on the preparation day and they took his dead body down on the preparation day. Read Luke 22:7-20. It says Jesus ate the Passover meal on the day of Passover. John says he was dead and buried on the day of Passover.
tillnow67 4 years ago
It does matter. Because here you talking about specific Jews. Preperation day is for the Sabbath. Not neccesarily Passover. And Biblically anyway, thursday night was the prepartion day. Technically friday. "The evening and the morning were the first day..." So Jesus ate and died on (Biblically) friday. Preperation day. Correct me if I'm wrong.
1LilKing 4 years ago
Read John 18:28 in your NIV. "to avoid ceremonial uncleanness the Jews did not enter the palace; they wanted to be able to eat the Passover" According to John this WAS CLEARLY the preparation day for the PASSOVER, not just some other sabbath. Keep pretending not to see it, it will make you no less wrong.
tillnow67 4 years ago
See what? This text doesn't even mention preperation. Tell me what I'm menat to see. In this text I don't see how Jesus or the disciples couldn't have eaten the Passover. Tell me
1LilKing 4 years ago
John repeatedly calls this day the preparation day. This text (John 18:28)makes it clear that it was the preparation day for the passover. All Jews were commanded to eat the passover at a specific time (see Nu 9:2-5) The jews didn't enter because it was the preparation day BEFORE the passover. They had not yet eaten the passover because the commanded time had not arrived yet. So if Jesus already ate it, he sinned.
tillnow67 4 years ago
...This is just after the confusion of who would betray Jesus, so they clearly weren't thinking straight. They had just eaten the Passover that night (Thursday night) Jesus and the disciples that is, as Luke 22 says. The Last supper was the Passover meal. Correct me if I'm wrong.
1LilKing 4 years ago
thanks for the vids,it is refreshing to see a fellow "atheist bible scholar",it's it ironic how those of us who have studied the bible and it's origins for so many years become atheist. The christians need to study more. i will look forward to more vids from you, thanks.
darwin489 4 years ago
Belive none of what you hear and half of what you read.its a story there are some things in it we can use in life as there always is in any story book but most of it is just a STORY,if i could rewrite the dictonary there would be lots of speeling mistakes but when it came to desribing the bible i would write ,contradiction,if i could spell it.this religious shit will never change, i can see you would like it too.its just to big please find another quest for your own sake.regards
ATKAOS 4 years ago
Even if you are correct why create contradictions you where none actually exist. Adkins says things like "if the disciples had already eaten the passover why would they want to eat the passover" and ignore the fact that the passover last of seven days. Then claim that if Christ had eaten the passover early he would not be the perfect lamb of God.2 Chr.30:2-5 gives a counter example to this. Luke 22:15 indicates the reason.
quantumcook 4 years ago
another nice job, Wayne.
KingHeathen 4 years ago
Good job!
healthyaddict 4 years ago
But it is also the case that the term pascha can refer to the entire eight-day period which included the feast of unleavened bread—thus from the 14th of Nisan to the 21st. Note this passage:
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, you shall observe the Passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten" (Ezek: 45:21; cf. Lk. 22:1, 7; Acts 12:3-4).
Matur1n 4 years ago
the Greek word for Passover is pascha. The term is used in three different senses in the Bible.
Sometimes the word stands for the Passover sacrifice, the lamb itself (Mk. 14:12; Lk. 22:7; 1 Cor. 5:7).
On other occasions pascha can denote the meal that was eaten on the 14th of Nisan, the first month of the Hebrew calendar (Mt. 26:18-19; Lk. 22:8, 13; Heb. 11:28).
Matur1n 4 years ago
Matur1n, you focused on that one word and DODGED everything else he said. Relisten to the 2:00-2:30 mark and realize that it doesn't matter WHICH meal you want to call it, there is STILL an error. There is much more in there...this was an extremely weak counterargument.
KingHeathen 4 years ago
If Jesus ate the Passover on the day of preparation and was tried and crucified on that same day then John18:28 could be referring to the other six days of feast. It does not say in any of the Gospels that Lamb was served at the last Supper.Preparation day was from Tuesday Sunset to Wednesday sunset.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Correction seven more days of feast
quantumcook 4 years ago
The Passover was eaten in Israeli a month after the normal time in 2 Chr.30:2-5. If this was not a sin then Jesus could have eaten the Passover a few hours before since he was going to become their Passover at the regular time.
quantumcook 4 years ago
QC, the Bible is the perfect word of God, right? He knows everything and even knew that we would have this conversation when he "wrote" the Bible, right?
KingHeathen 4 years ago
The statement that God knows everything and is Omniscient is a figure of speech called a synecdoche, where all is used for a part. There are many scriptures that indicate that God sees, discovers gets to know some things as they occur. See (Gen 2:19; 18:21; 2Chr:12:7; Isa 59:15-16; Jonah 3:6). God knows his overall plan from beginning to end but not all the details about free will choices.
quantumcook 4 years ago
So he DOESN'T know everything? And CAN'T control things to make HIS PLAN happen EXACTLY like he wants it?
KingHeathen 4 years ago
Even us dumb humans with our limited knowledge can be quite good at predicting statistical behavior. Statistical Mechanics works without knowing the behavior of individual particles.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Even though God is a personal,God does not need to know what choices each individual or even group will make in order to make HIS PLAN happen exactly like he wants.
quantumcook 4 years ago
ok, so you DO think that he WILL MAKE his PLAN work when needed...so...KNOWING that this verse would cause so much contraversy now, WHY DIDN'T HE make sure the writers of the Bible WROTE DOWN whichever of your hypothesized posibilities were true INSTEAD of having them write down the one that makes it look 100% like a complete and total contradiction?
KingHeathen 4 years ago
The meaning becomes clear when you tie together all the scriptures together and find the one interpretation that makes all of them true. He ate the passover a little early and died on the preparation day. 2Chr30:2-5 makes it clear if there is a good reason the passover can be eaten at a different time than normal.
quantumcook 4 years ago
The meaning is now so clear after a little effort that I can not see another interpretation.Luke I believe makes it clear that the passover was prepared.The Supper in John refers to the meal of the first day of the passover which they ate a few hours early.John was trying to make the time of the crucifixion more clear than Luke or Matt. and did not refer to it as a passover.
quantumcook 4 years ago
I ENTIRELY disagree with you and STILL say you are making excuses to justify a contradiction that is OBVIOUS that you would state on anyone ELSE'S religion...just not your own!
KingHeathen 4 years ago
Have you not observed me correcting Christians when they use stupid arguments about science. If a Christian were to claim a contradiction an another religion that was false I would not hesitate to correct the Christian.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Even Matt. and Luke need this interpretation to account for the full three days and nights that Jesus was in the heart of the earth. The next day after His death had to be the High Sabbath instead of the Weekly Sabbath.
quantumcook 4 years ago
while I agree that you are one of the MUCH more sensible of Christians that I've talked with here, I still say you are making concessions for your religion that you wouldn't do for someone else's. For example, (let's test the theory)...would you agree that the Quran is suggesting the world is flat when it says God "spread the Earth out like a carpet"?
KingHeathen 4 years ago
I have to ask how would a Muslim respond to this? Earth could refer to the crust of the Earth that man travels on.A carpet can cover a surface of any shape.
quantumcook 4 years ago
oh come on. We aren't talking about "wall to wall carpet"...this is around 300CE..."carpet" then wasn't much more than a RUG.
KingHeathen 4 years ago
Maybe from Allah's perspective a surface the size of a continent wasn't much more than a rug.Since I do not speak Arabic and am not a Muslim I am not really qualified as an Apologist of Islam.I need an accurate translation and context for how the Arabic word translated as Earth is used here.
quantumcook 4 years ago
no, what you mean is you are going to avoid the issue because you know it traps you. Bottom line is that on NUMEROUS occasions the Quran implies a flat Earth. So does your Bible. But I guess you proved me wrong, you'll make acceptions in your logic for ANY religion, not just Christianity.
KingHeathen 4 years ago
I would be reluctant to claim a contradiction if there unless I was really sure no one could give a valid answer. You sure have a lot of faith that no one can come up with a valid explanation.
quantumcook 4 years ago
I am glad you disagree with me.Anyone who thinks Caesar was the Antichrist will defiantly Buy Bull.
quantumcook 4 years ago
King Heathen's Biblical logic applied to Science.
1. Thomas Young's double slit shows that light behaves as a wave.
2. Heinrich Rudolf Hertz's photoelectric effect shows that light behaved as a particle.
"There is an obvious contradiction here. Since scientific evidence is contradictory science is unreliable and this must be simply made up."
Quantum cook's Biblical Logic applied to Science. "We should try to find the interpretation that makes both of the true."
quantumcook 4 years ago
OH NO, don't play me that way. Take your 1 and 2, my conclusion is: ONE or BOTH of them is wrong. Time for more testing. I don't immediately write off both. The change could be due to an unseen variable, or one simply made a mistake, or they are both mistaken. Science isn't bound by "all or nothing"...
KingHeathen 4 years ago
Your conclusion that one or both are wrong would be wrong.Light is a particle with a wave describing its behavior. Both experiments are correct although it seems counterintuitive. The Matthew Luke Linage is very simple to reconcile once you release how.
quantumcook 4 years ago
I really don't care in the instance which is right wrong or both or neither...my point was, I don't have a problem deciding something that is erroneous is as such. If you want to dance around the lineage (which wasn't what I was talking about) or whatever other contradiction you want to twist into a "plausible" but not "probable" truth...go ahead, I'm not buying. If it were as you said it was, then a "perfect god" would have made it say so.
KingHeathen 4 years ago
I see. You were referring to the Census and King Herod and the time of Jesus Birth problem.You have a problem seeing that something is correct if it at first appears wrong,but not seeing something as wrong that really is.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Ex. Each gospel writer (supposedly) wrote their books independantly. So why DIDN'T Luke include the story of Herod? Why DIDN'T Matthew include the story of the census? Why DIDN'T one inlude the shepards and the other the magi?
KingHeathen 4 years ago
I will ask the authors when I get to Heaven and find out.
quantumcook 4 years ago
SPPPPFT! DUDE! You just made me spit my beer everwhere!!! I hope you are happy!
KingHeathen 4 years ago
How without taking away human freedom and free will would God have made it say so.God chooses not to exert that much determinism on being of free will.God made sure they had correct information but did not dictate how the writers wrote it. Maybe God is not perfect as you perceive perfect.
quantumcook 4 years ago
ok, I think I still have free will if he simple makes his story CLEAR. I can't think of a SINGLE book with more errors or contradictions than the Bible...if MAN can write a book with such clarity and precision...why couldn't God? Perfect? He's not even close.
KingHeathen 4 years ago
If you tie it all together and find the interpretations that do not contradict then only numerical errors that even I cannot reconcile will remain. The actual meanings are still clear.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Uhh...no. Quantum logic on a classical scale, just stop it. Don't make physics look bad. This is
a philological problem, not a quantum one.
Newton1692 4 years ago
Even on the large scale you can be faced to reconcile too contradictory ideas. Astrophysicist used to have too theories of Galaxy formation.One that galaxies formed first then stars or that stars formed first. Currently coevolution of both seems to be currect.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Ok Newton 1692I did nothing to imply that quantum logic is required to solve this problem. I believe Jesus ate the Passover meal early in both Luke and John. John simply calls it Supper. Quantum Logic applied to this would allow a superposition of both eating and not eating the Passover. I said nothing as absurd as you imply.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Newton 1692 Google -A SUPERCONDUCTING "SCHRODINGER'S CAT" and see what you find. Here a large assembly of electrons are in a superposition of clockwise and counterclockwise motion.
quantumcook 4 years ago
No I suggested he was alive in both Matthew and Luke. It was also suggested that the first Census was when Quirinsus governed rather than was governor of Syria. This was earlier than the 6-9 C.E. census mentioned in Acts 5:37.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Newton 1692 Did I suggest that King Herod could somehow be in a superposition state of dead and alive at the time of Jesus birth.
quantumcook 4 years ago
No. But you said things like:1. Thomas Young's double slit shows that light behaves as a wave.
2. Heinrich Rudolf Hertz's photoelectric effect shows that light behaved as a particle.
"There is an obvious contradiction here. Since scientific evidence is contradictory science is unreliable and this must be simply made up."
Quantum cook's Biblical Logic applied to Science. "We should try to find the interpretation that makes both of the true."
Newton1692 4 years ago
There is of course no contradiction but the principle of complementarity which there is copius evidence for. The science of physics and the science of history are different, since the source material in history is less controlable. The historian does not have the privilige of orginal datum (see:Cohen and Nagel, Logic and the Scientific method). I think that you are not making the distinction between historical science and physical science clear enough.
Newton1692 4 years ago
Two manuscripts that report the same event (For example :Did Caesar cross the Rubicon?) differently can not be held in the same regard as the Directly Observed phenomena which you mention here. History and Physics use the scientific method, that's what makes them scientific, but history has different constraints.
Newton1692 4 years ago
My working hypothesis is that the scriptures are not written independently. Most historical documents do not claim divine inspiration. It is this claim of divine inspiration that Wayne Atkins strives to refute. Time and time again I see that claims of contradiction are baseless and my confidence in scripture only increases.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Newton 1692 --Thanks for your replies. I agree that two documents reporting the same event cannot be held in the same regard as directly observed phenomena. I am sorry for not making that clear earlier. I was simply drawing a comparison in that the truth is more likely to be the interpretation that does not conflict if possible. So far as I have found that all so conflicts, except for numerical ones, disappear with a little bit of effort.
quantumcook 4 years ago
when I was in the middle part of my deconversion, neither was the Bible. I accepted the idea that maybe Matthew was right, but Luke was wrong. Maybe this prophesy was true but that one wasn't. It was a logical decision to make. Unfortunately for the church, it led to a new set of problems, but that's another story.
KingHeathen 4 years ago
I'm curious Matur1n, why do you believe that the bible is true? Are there any other texts from that time that corroborate the stories of the bible? There's NO proof, and NO way to know anyway, unless you lived during that time...so realistically, you simply ASSUME the bible is true. Why assume? You know the saying that goes along with that word, don't you?
siciliano29 4 years ago
If Jesus are the Passover on the day of preparation and also died on that same day then in John 13:29 the disciples could have believed Jesus sent Judas to buy supplies for the next six days of feast.
quantumcook 4 years ago
Correction seven more days. All four Gospels could refer to the preparation day portion of the passover feast.I believe Matur1n has a very good point.
quantumcook 4 years ago