On pages 25-28 of Jesus Interrupted, Professor Ehrman, says that there are discrepancies between Mark’s gospel (Mark 15) and John’s (John 19), concerning the day Jesus was crucified (Mark: on the day of Passover, John: the day of Preparation before the day of Passover) and even the time (Mark: 3rd hour, John: 6th hour).
I’ve done a search for this and the Christian websites that refute there are any contradictions here point to how the Jewish 24 hours were counted differently to that of our Gregorian Calendar. I will say though, that what parts I did understand, they seemed to resolve the discrepancy and so I’m left wondering if Professor Ehrman was wrong in this particular instance.
The best way I can explain what I mean is by way of this graphic (as concerns the Jewish 24-hour day cycle):
** you do not have permission to see this link **
I don’t pretend to know quite what they are saying when Christians mention the “3rd” hour and “6th” hour in relation to the above graphic, so I was hoping someone with more knowledge might be able to tell if the Christians are wrong and there is, in fact, a contradiction between Mark’s gospel and John’s. Specifically, did Mark or John get their days and times mixed up?
Thank you
There is a difference. I mean, it’s right there in black and white. But I guess it depends on what one uses the Gospels for. If one puts their faith in the Bible as the support of their faith, then they will be disappointed, in my opinion, because the Bible is written by human beings. But if one uses the Bible as a guide and realizes that the “word of God” is in the Bible and not the Bible then there’s no problem. The discrepancy becomes a curiosity and nothing more.
When I wrote my Gospel harmony (The Veridican Gospel of Jesus Christ) I only imply that he was crucified on a Thursday and his empty tomb was discovered on the following Sunday morning (three days after his death). I only say that he was crucified and a total of six hours passed before his death.
One of the reasons I wrote the VGJC is because I felt the Holy Spirit always wanted us to have just a single Gospel, not four. I also think the Holy Spirit wanted the Gospel of Thomas included in that Gospel harmony, so I edited them all together.
The good thing about a single Gospel, a single harmony, is that it forces us to feel and hear the guidance of the Holy Spirit–just like each of the Gospel writers felt and heard the Holy Spirit.
So, if you ask me, the discrepancies exist to motivate us to create a single Gospel record. So, that’s what I did.
SeaJay said
I was wondering if Jesus was crucified on different days because Professor Ehrman writes:Mark: crucified on the day of Passover
John: crucified on the day of Preparation which is the day before the day of Passover
Despite what everyone else will say, mark is getting his information from matthew. What matters is that Matthew says Jesus was crucified on day of passover – on the preparation day (παρασκευὴ) of the sabbath, that is Friday.
Luke and Mark follow Matthew.
John says Jesus was crucified on παρασκευὴ of the passover. Which appears to mean prepsration day or fay before passover. However παρασκευὴ only means preparation day specifically of the sabbath, the passover had no preparation day. Also by “passover” John meant the full week-long festival. John is saying Jesus was crucified on the Friday of the passovwe week – the sabbath being the high sabbath of the bwginning of the festival of weeks.
The attempts to resolve the contradiction between Mark and John are legion, to be surpassed in ingenuity only by attempts to resolve the nativity stories. If someone hasn’t done it already it would be interesting to collect all the efforts both historical and contemporary in a single book.
Hngerhman said
Yes, were it a problem that could be resolved by semantic analysis, it very likely would have been already, and no one would be here disagreeing about it.
Well any “problem” is more apparent than real. We must simply accept the fact we have diverging accounts. Of course the realization that the gospel writers might be willing to modify the “facts” to fit their theological agenda leads to some disturbing implications. What else might they have changed in such a way? Eventually it will occur that perhaps we’re not dealing with facts at all but that it is all theology.
While I’m not a mythicist I do describe myself as a historical minimalist, meaning that I think we have only a skeleton of historicity fleshed out by stories that mostly originated subsequent to Jesus’ demise.
At no point in his gospel does John say the crucifixion takes place before the passover.
For John, Jesus is also the bread of life/ the manna from heaven. According to Joshua 5:11-12 this manna from heaven stopped the day after the israelites celebrated the passover having entered the promised land. John’s theological agenda would therefore be to keep the relation between passover and crucifixion exactly where Matthew had placed it.
Josephus Antiquities 16,6,2 “and that they (the Jews) be not obliged to go before any judge on the Sabbath-day, nor on the παρασκευὴ after the ninth hour.”
ie Jews should not be compelled to go before a Judge on saturday nor on friday after 3pm.
Didache “But let not your fasts be with the hypocrites for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week; but fast on the fourth day and the παρασκευὴ”
ie – dont fast on monday and thursday, fast on wednesday and friday instead.
Mark 15:42 “It was παρασκευὴ, that is, the day before the Sabbath”
ie – it was Friday, that is, the day before saturday.
If we translate παρασκευὴ as “Friday” (as everyone tells us to), in all four gospels, there are no diverging accounts of the crucifixion in relation to the passover.
brenmcg said
However παρασκευὴ only means preparation day specifically of the sabbath, the passover had no preparation day.
Hi Brenmcg – would you mind unpacking this? What I’ve read (which is many scholars, but certainly not all, nor probably even a statistically significant sample set) seem to think there was a preparation day for the first day of the Passover week. Perhaps some of our friends on this forum who have studied second temple Judaism more closely can comment?
Hngerhman said
Hi Brenmcg – would you mind unpacking this? What I’ve read (which is many scholars, but certainly not all, nor probably even a statistically significant sample set) seem to think there was a preparation day for the first day of the Passover week. Perhaps some of our friends on this forum who have studied second temple Judaism more closely can comment?
The only reason a day of rest needs a day of preparation is when you can’t even prepare food on the day of rest. If you want to eat on the sabbath you must prepare the food before sun-down on Friday, otherwise you won’t eat.
However Exodus 12:16 allows preparation of food on the passover; “On the first day you shall hold a holy assembly, and on the seventh day a holy assembly; no work shall be done on those days; but what every one must eat, that only may be prepared by you.”
Preparation for the passover is began 4 days prior, when the lamb to be slaughtered is selected. So there’s no specific “preparation day” for the passover.
Luke 22:1 and Josephus Antiquities 9,13,3 “but as the feast of unleavened bread was now come, when they had offered that sacrifice which is called the passover” tell us that “passover” and week-long “feast of unleavened bread” are used interchangeably.
Mark and Didache tell us παρασκευὴ means “Friday”.
John 19:14 shouldn’t be understood as anything other than “It was the Friday of the Feast of Unleavened Bread”.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
2 Guest(s)