There seems to always be a surge of topics surrounding whatever is happening at that time of year :) Christmas, Easter, etc.

I'd love to discuss the Synoptic's passion chronology @DickHarfield

Hi @JoshuaBigbee

@DickHarfield Hello!

I think it's a false dichotomy to set up John against the Synoptics as being unified in saying the trial and crucifixion is on the 15th. I think that one really needs to resolve the apparent internal contradictions of the Synoptics independently before trying to compare to John

@JoshuaBigbee Please don't think that I am in any way an expert on Greek Koine. I wasn't going to answer your question but leave it for a more qualified expert. However: you invited me to do so; so far no one else had proposed an answer; I thought it was a useful exercise for me in developing my Greek.

@DickHarfield I know just enough for it to be dangerous myself, so I don't trust basing any arguments on such things either. I appreciated your take on it

@JoshuaBigbee What internal contradictions of the Synoptics do you see as relevant here?

They in no way clearly say its on the 15th. People assume that from the Last Supper account, but then ignore that all 3 accounts also later say it was the Day of Preparation

Matt 27:62, Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54

Its one of the things that all four gospels are completely unified on. John 19:31, 42 says the same thing

I just looked at Mark 15:42 and it says "And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath," so here meaning a different thing to John's "the preparation of the passover"

So rather than change our view on the day of the crucifixion, or say that John and the Synoptics disagree on the crucifixion day, it seems more logical to me to take what they DO agree on and examine where they disagree separately (last supper)

To make sure we are on the same page, do you accept that it is the almost universal consensus of scholars that Matthew & Luke copied from Mark?

Not really. And if we work backwards logically, we would see that it really doesn't matter. Since regardless of when you think Passover was, or the day of crucifixion, no one is "preparing" anything on the 15th. It is a Sabbath day with not work to be done. They would have been cleaning the leaven out on the 14th. So whether its the Preparation for Passover or the Preparation for 7th day, it would STILL have to be done the day before.

i) Whether or not they copy Mark does matter in terms of how we understand any apparent inconsistencies in the Synoptics.

@DickHarfield Err...close enough. I actually believe in an early Matthew primacy, but that Mark was the first written in Greek and the Matthew we have was a re-written Greek version which used both the earlier hebrew Matthew version and Mark. And Luke was the 3rd and had both plus his own research (adding things like Peter on the water)

Your comment on another thread was interesting where you challenged the Synoptic's understanding of Jewish custom? Is that where you are going?

OK This means we are not going to reach agreement in any discussion on inconsistencies in the synoptics. That said, it does not affect my answer to your question.

You mention another thread (which I don't remember). Since 'Mark' was a gentile, he can be excused for not knowing Jewish customs.

'John' was probably also a gentile, but shows an impressive understanding of Jewish customs, which may be one reason he decided the crucifixion must have taken place before the Passover.

It was on this answer of yours on Christianity:

Gotcha

I just think that if all accounts agree on B, C and D. But they seem to disagree on A, it is logical to search for a better understanding of A and accept B, C and D. Rather than say A makes B, C and D all now also disagree (when if you didn't read A, you would think they did)

A, B, C, D are generic, a philosophical statement?

A = Last supper, B = Trials C=Crucifixion and burial and D= resurrection. It is ONLY on the Last supper that they appear to disagree.

@DickHarfield I initially meant it philosophically, or maybe forumulaically, but we can easily assign those values.

There are so many things on which M,M,L & J disagree that I would not know where to start. However, it is not my purpose to convince you, merely explain my answer...

Would you at least agree that logically if we can provide a solution for the disagreement on A that would be the simplest solution?

Simplest solutions are not always the best. Occam tells us to use the simplest if all else is equal, but that may be wrong.

I do understand it is not that clean, its more complex than that. I just think it is equally oversimplifying things to say the synoptics agree that the crucifixion was on the 15th. Does that at least make sense now?

When the synoptics agree with Mark, I read that one source (Mark) states this. When they disagree with Mark, I then look for a reason. In this case, the synoptics agre with Mark.

I would actually love to hear those "other things" that the accounts disagree on? I am currently attempting to make a parallel list of things all four agree on and things that contradict.

Ok, Joshua. I'm sure we will have opportunities. Now, lunch is calling me.

I hope my answer was of some use to you. I found this discussion stimulating and I hope you have also.

@DickHarfield Lunch!? Yes, I should get some sleep soon myself.

Bye for now ...

@DickHarfield As always Dick! Enjoy your day

Thank you :)

@DickHarfield You can answer this maybe whenever you have the chance, but I'll put the question here before I forget it myself: Would you go so far as to say that Mark is wrong in that some events he described did not happen, or did not happen in that way (or close, within reason) OR are you just saying his lack of Jewish knowledge made him describe the events incorrectly? I hope that distinction makes sense?

@JoshuaBigbee Hermeneutics ought to be approached without preconceptions, so I ought not have an answer to that question. That does not mean I can't refer to the conclusions of others.

The late Raymond E. Brown, supposedly regarded internationally as the dean of New Testament scholars, says in An Introduction to the New Testament that clearly Mark's passion narrative has dramatised events; but in terms of underlying reality, it is quite likely that Jewish Temple and Sanhedrin authorities were seriously involved in the death of Jesus and handed him over to the Romans who executed him.

Notice there that Fr Brown is saying there is an underlying reality that has been dramatised.

More broadly, Mark 5:1 says Jesus crossed the Sea of Galilee to the land of the Gerasenes, a geographically improbable destination. In the parallel passage, Matthew 8:28 substitutes 'Gadarenes' - not quite the same, but a plausible destination.

If Matt is right, Mark is wrong, and vice versa. It is generally accepted that the author of Matt was trying to correct Mark's error. Again, there can be an underlying reality, but in this case a synoptic discrepancy because Matt's author was sufficiently aware.