FTAggies said:
https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/booklets/jesus-christ-the-real-story/when-was-jesus-christ-crucified-and-resurrected
I was just curious the history and rationale behind this tradition as this is the first objection I've seen
Yep, this is pretty much spot on. Some scholars, taking note of the two sabbaths, have proposed a Thursday crucifixion. However, the preparing of spices is best paired with a non-sabbath day between the two sabbaths and a Wednesday crucifixion. The one thing that is beyond any reasonable reading of the text is a Friday crucifixion.
I think the writer probably has strained a bit to put the date in AD 31, because there are some calendar variations that occurred throughout history. I would say that AD 31 is a big maybe. However, if we backtrack to the time of Jesus' birth, taking note of copyist's errors that that placed it no later than 4 BC, we now know that Jesus was likely born in 2 BC, in the 7th month of the year . If we then flip the calendar to Jan1 1st, AD 1, Jesus would have been about 21 months old. Fast forward 28 years to late 27/early 28 AD, and Jesus was in his 30th year, the time when Levites entered the priestly service. For Jesus, being both priest and king, he was baptized and began his 3+ year earthly ministry.
...Which takes us to early AD 31, the month of Nisan, and the crucifixion. 31 AD fits very well with the timeline.
Now, in addition to the link provided, I will add a few things. If you look in Matthew 28, the chapter in your bible says "after the Sabbath." However, in the original language, it says "after the sabbaths." In order to fit the Good Friday narrative, translators capriciously changed the plural to the singular. There were 2 sabbaths! Whether you place them on Thursday-Friday or Wednesday-Friday is up for some debate, but the best evidence is for a Wednesday Passover.
In addition, read Luke 24:13 - 21. The men on the road to Emmaus. Read plainly, the text implies clearly a Thursday crucifixion ("this happened 3 days ago") or a Wed. crucifixion ("he has been dead for 3 days"). Finally, consider the tradition of the soul departing the body on the 4th day. By Sunday, Jesus, like Lazarus, was not only dead, but "good and dead."
This whole blatant Good Friday error continues to baffle me. Several years ago I went to a lecture by Dr. Peter Williams, entitled "Some things that ought to be better known about the resurrection." You can look it up. Dr. Williams went through the evidence about Tacitus, Pliny, Josephus, and laid out a very strong case. Then, in the same lecture, he began to place dates around the resurrection, and remarkably began, without evidence, that the crucifixion occurred on Friday! I couldn't believe that such a great scholar could just abandon scholarship so suddenly. The dude is a world-renowned scholar in classical languages, yet he didn't know the difference between singular and plural. It just shows you how deeply ingrained this error is.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough