Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Malachi151 · 05-01-2007, 11:10 AM

Interestingly, Paul never says that Jesus was killed on Passover, he just calls him a Passover Lamb in one letter where he is talking about how a group of around the time of Passover.

At the same time, The Book of Hebrews describes Jesus as the Yom Kippur sacrifice, and never says anything about him being killed on Passover, an odd thing for a letter written specifically to Jews that goes into great detail on the significance of the "sacrifice" of "the high priest" Jesus.

Yom Kippur is in October BTW.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur

http://biblicalholidays.com/messiah_in_yom_kippur.htm

http://biblia.com/jesusbible/leviticus3.htm

http://www.appleofhiseye.org/Whatdoy...2/Default.aspx

Now, why would the Book of Hebrews describe Jesus as a Yom Kippur sacrifice if he had just recently been killed on Passover?

Why would Jesus, in reality, have been killed on Passover or Yom Kippur, since this would have been illegal under Jewish law and a totally idiotic thing to do if you were Jewish officials?

If the earliest descriptions of the death of Jesus describe his death as a symbolic sacrifice on either Yom Kippur or Passover, what are the chances that any of this is anything other than mythology.....

Malachi151 · 05-02-2007, 05:04 AM

In addition to this, in 1 Corinthians 11, where Paul discusses the Eucharist ritual, he says "on the night that he was given up". Now, wouldn't Paul place this night on Passover eve if indeed it were on Passover eve? This day is pretty specific, for him not to mention that this was Passover eve here, tels me that he didn't associate it with Passover eve, nor his death with Passover.

gstafleu · 05-02-2007, 07:59 AM

I take it you are referring to Heb 9/10? What Paul is doing there is explaining how that yearly Yom-Kippur sacrifice wasn't very efficient, and that the Christ-sacrifice works much better: it is a one-time shot and your done. But that doesn't necessitate that Christ was sacrificed on Yom-Kippur. This bigger better sacrifice could have been done at any time, like Passover e.g. Whenever done, it still replaces the now-obsolete Yom-Kippur slaughter.

Talking about slaughter, from Heb 9/10 it is not clear that Paul is envisioning a "real" Mel-Gibson-style sacrifice. He goes into great detail about the goriness of the YK sacrifice, but then paints Christ sacrifice in 9:14 as "How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!" So Christ offered himself "through the eternal Spirit," which doesn't sound all that bloody. Also he arrived "unblemished" at God. That doesn't sound bloody either. This is then reinforced in 10:22, where we should get close to God "having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water." Note the "pure water" rather than the bloody mess of YK.

In other words, to explain Heb 9/10 there is no need for a sacrifice at Yom Kippur, no need for a real crucifixion either.

Gerard Stafleu

Malachi151 · 05-03-2007, 09:11 AM

Paul didn't write Hebrews. It's clear that the writer of Hebrews associated the death of Jesus with Yom Kippur if anything.

Secondly, that this person wouldn't have associated it with Passover if Jesus had indeed been killed on Passover is unfathomable.

Larsguy47 · 05-03-2007, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Paul didn't write Hebrews. It's clear that the writer of Hebrews associated the death of Jesus with Yom Kippur is anything.

Secondly, that this person wouldn't have associated it with Passover if Jesus had indeed been killed on Passover is unfathomable.

Jesus fulfills EVERYTHING in the LAW at some point. That means ALL the sacrifices, all the special ceremonies and festivals. The Festival of Booths, for instance, is celebrated for when Christ would come to the earth to "dwell with mankind" in a booth, that is, outside the formal home. Jesus was born outside in an animal shelter which could have been simply a booth of sorts, etc.

PASSOVER, though has two special sabbaths days, one on the 1st day of unfermented cakes and one on the 7th day. This allows Jesus to celebrate the actual passover and then die at the same time the lambs are killed at 3:00 p.m. on the day of preparation. So Jesus does die during Passover week on Nisan 20th, 33 CE, but he does not die on the same day the Seder meal is eaten, and certainly not on Nisan 14th, which is obvious since he celebrates passover with his disciples who killed the lamb at the customary time.

Thus Jesus can represent both sacrifices at various times of the year since it is a general fulfillment, not specific necessarily or not specific always.

Thus he is the "Passover Lamb" because he was sacrificed during Passover Week, which was a whole week's celebration. He need not have been killed just before passover when the lambs for passover are normally killed. But there is some symbolism of that importance, since his own death does occur at the same TIME as the passover lambs are killed and on the same type of day, that is, the day before a sabbath, the day of preparation. But the actual DATE of when the passover lambs are killed and the actual DATE of Jesus' death are not the same. Of course, Nisan 20th is not in October.

LG47

3DJay · 05-03-2007, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

This allows Jesus to celebrate the actual passover and then die at the same time the lambs are killed at 3:00 p.m. on the day of preparation.

3:00 p.m.?!!!!! Say it ain't so Lars!!!!!

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=204400

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

Josephus mentions an eclipse that occurred the very night two rabbis were burned at the stake. This suggests that the executions occurred at night. Was this the standard custom?

Apparently so, because of March 15:25 which notes that Jesus was impaled at the "third hour", which is 9 o'clock, but making no special indication as to whether this is 9 p.m. or 9 a.m. Lacking that distinction one would assume it was understood which "third hour" was in question. If night-time impalements were actually the custom then there would be no need to stipulate whether this was night or day.

MARK 15:25 "It was now the third hour, and they impaled him."

But how do we know for sure it was the 9th hour of the night that Jesus was impaled? The answer is because two events occurred at noon in relation to Jesus' impalement and trial. Hi trial occurred at noon, and after he was impaled it became dark for three hours before his death at 3:00 p.m. This obviously took place on two separate days, with obviously, the trial occurring before his impalement.

Thus it was either at 9:00 p.m. or a.m. that Jesus was impaled. The more obvious and logical is the first 9 o'clock after the trial which would have been 9:00 p.m. Of course, as noted, it seems that night-time executions were standard. The fact that no further explanation is provided by Mark regarding the impalement, again, also suggests the custom of the impalements at night.

Jesus and the two evildoers were expected to be impaled for close to at least a day before they would be taken down. The sabbath was the following day beginning at sunset. Thus obviously they would not wait until the next morning at 9 a.m. to impale the prisoners who would be taken down less than 9 hours later. But 21 hours would be enough time for death to take place and if not their legs were broken causing them to asphyxiate.

9:00 p.m. was a time available to most persons to observe since they would not be working likely and the Jewish day began at nightfall, thus when the impalements followed a sabbath day, the earliest time would have been after sundown/nightfall.

LG47

Peace

Roland · 05-03-2007, 12:23 PM

Doesn't anyone else find it suspicious that Jesus just happened to "arrange" all the necessary elements (i.e. arrives in Jerusalem, gets himself arrested, tried and sentenced) so that he would be executed on such a heavily symbolic day? If nothing else screams out "fiction!" in this tale, that surely does.

Larsguy47 · 05-03-2007, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3DJay

3:00 p.m.?!!!!! Say it ain't so Lars!!!!!

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=204400

Peace

The hour when Jesus was impaled, that is nails driven through feet and hands was 9:00 p.m. (the "third hour", Mark 15:25) It got dark the next day at noon for three hours, and then his actual DEATH was at 3:00 p.m. (the ninth hour). This occurred on Nisan 20th, which was a day of "preparation for passover" (John 19:14) a reference to the second high-sabbath day of Passover on the 21st, the 7th day of unfermented cakes. But of note, the similarity between the killing of the lambs on the day of preparation at 3:00 p.m. becomes a parallel significance.

LG47

spamandham · 05-03-2007, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland

Doesn't anyone else find it suspicious that Jesus just happened to "arrange" all the necessary elements (i.e. arrives in Jerusalem, gets himself arrested, tried and sentenced) so that he would be executed on such a heavily symbolic day? If nothing else screams out "fiction!" in this tale, that surely does.

The story is obviously fiction, to anyone who does not have a christian bias, and who is familiar with the OT passages that were twisted to contrive it. That said, it's still valid to analyze it from a literary historical perspective, to try to figure out what the authors had in mind.

Amaleq13 · 05-03-2007, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

The hour when Jesus was impaled, that is nails driven through feet and hands was 9:00 p.m. (the "third hour", Mark 15:25) It got dark the next day at noon for three hours, and then his actual DEATH was at 3:00 p.m. (the ninth hour).

Does it make sense to suggest that Pilate would be surprised Jesus was "already" dead after spending 18 hours on the cross? (Mk 15:44)

05-01-2007, 11:10 AM	#1
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Jesus "killed" on Yom Kippur or Passover? Interestingly, Paul never says that Jesus was killed on Passover, he just calls him a Passover Lamb in one letter where he is talking about how a group of around the time of Passover. At the same time, The Book of Hebrews describes Jesus as the Yom Kippur sacrifice, and never says anything about him being killed on Passover, an odd thing for a letter written specifically to Jews that goes into great detail on the significance of the "sacrifice" of "the high priest" Jesus. Yom Kippur is in October BTW. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur http://biblicalholidays.com/messiah_in_yom_kippur.htm http://biblia.com/jesusbible/leviticus3.htm http://www.appleofhiseye.org/Whatdoy...2/Default.aspx Now, why would the Book of Hebrews describe Jesus as a Yom Kippur sacrifice if he had just recently been killed on Passover? Why would Jesus, in reality, have been killed on Passover or Yom Kippur, since this would have been illegal under Jewish law and a totally idiotic thing to do if you were Jewish officials? If the earliest descriptions of the death of Jesus describe his death as a symbolic sacrifice on either Yom Kippur or Passover, what are the chances that any of this is anything other than mythology.....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-02-2007, 05:04 AM	#2
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	In addition to this, in 1 Corinthians 11, where Paul discusses the Eucharist ritual, he says "on the night that he was given up". Now, wouldn't Paul place this night on Passover eve if indeed it were on Passover eve? This day is pretty specific, for him not to mention that this was Passover eve here, tels me that he didn't associate it with Passover eve, nor his death with Passover.

05-02-2007, 07:59 AM	#3
gstafleu Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: London, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,719	I take it you are referring to Heb 9/10? What Paul is doing there is explaining how that yearly Yom-Kippur sacrifice wasn't very efficient, and that the Christ-sacrifice works much better: it is a one-time shot and your done. But that doesn't necessitate that Christ was sacrificed on Yom-Kippur. This bigger better sacrifice could have been done at any time, like Passover e.g. Whenever done, it still replaces the now-obsolete Yom-Kippur slaughter. Talking about slaughter, from Heb 9/10 it is not clear that Paul is envisioning a "real" Mel-Gibson-style sacrifice. He goes into great detail about the goriness of the YK sacrifice, but then paints Christ sacrifice in 9:14 as "How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!" So Christ offered himself "through the eternal Spirit," which doesn't sound all that bloody. Also he arrived "unblemished" at God. That doesn't sound bloody either. This is then reinforced in 10:22, where we should get close to God "having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water." Note the "pure water" rather than the bloody mess of YK. In other words, to explain Heb 9/10 there is no need for a sacrifice at Yom Kippur, no need for a real crucifixion either. Gerard Stafleu

05-03-2007, 09:11 AM	#4
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Paul didn't write Hebrews. It's clear that the writer of Hebrews associated the death of Jesus with Yom Kippur if anything. Secondly, that this person wouldn't have associated it with Passover if Jesus had indeed been killed on Passover is unfathomable.

05-03-2007, 12:23 PM	#7
Roland Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: California Posts: 748	Doesn't anyone else find it suspicious that Jesus just happened to "arrange" all the necessary elements (i.e. arrives in Jerusalem, gets himself arrested, tried and sentenced) so that he would be executed on such a heavily symbolic day? If nothing else screams out "fiction!" in this tale, that surely does.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.