The Day Jesus Was Crucified: Studies in Mark, Pt. 77

In study #76 of my “Studies in Mark” series, I explored some issues surrounding the “time” of Jesus’ crucifixion in the four Gospel accounts. In the main, I gave some thoughts on how time was viewed, understood and used in Mediterranean antiquity and how these factors should be borne in mind when reading the various NT accounts. In the end, I concluded that in the work titled “John” (and the same is true of Luke) the author’s are using temporal approximations—in more simple terms: they were saying “Jesus was crucified at about or around such and such time of day.” John says Jesus was crucified at about Noon while Mark says it was 9am. The fact is, John is clearly approximating when he uses the word “about” (again, Luke does the same). Mark does not offer a specific word that denotes approximation; at first glance he seems to be more specific. However, given the cultural norms of time-telling back then, any seemingly specific time that was given should still be taken lightly. To find out more why, click HERE.

Of course, scholars have thought through and argued over the supposed discrepancies between the Markan and Johannine accounts. Some have suggested that the authors have different narrative and theological agendas and that this accounts for the tensions. Others have suggested that a textual variant, that is, the changing of the Greek digamma to a gamma is the answer. Others, particularly fundamentalist atheists have contended that the “contradictions” between Mark and John on the foundational event of Christian, the crucifixion, shows that the Bible is wholly untrustworthy. I do not hold any of these views. As I explained in study #76, there is another, easier and more contextual way (in my view) to make sense of all that is being said.

Just to be clear about where I’m going with this post, I should probably recount the argument that I’m going against. The argument is as follows: John’s work says that Jesus was crucified on the evening before Passover (Nisan 14) and Mark’s says He was killed on the day of Passover (Nisan 15). He couldn’t have been killed twice and thus, He couldn’t have been killed on two different days, so, how might we make sense of this? Well, to go ahead and answer the obvious, I will say that Jesus was killed once, on one day and that the day was the 15th day of the Jewish month called Nisan. He was killed during the 2nd watch of the day, which would have been between 9am and Noon (remember, Jewish days were divided into four watches and the nights were also separated into four watches, totaling eight periods of three hours each in a 24-hour span).

Instead of contending that Jesus was killed a day earlier than He was supposed to be as many scholars have done, that is, that He was killed on Nisan 14—and as a result cannot be viewed as the “Passover Lamb”—what I am going to offer here is a simple timeline of how the Gospels lay out the events. This timeline shows that, indeed, the authors are all in agreement that Jesus was killed on Nisan 15 and was viewed as the Passover Lamb (of course, John’s theology emphasizes the “Lamb” aspect more than the other accounts). Before going on, I should point out two things: 1) All of the Gospel writers, with the possible exception of Matthew, refer to the Passover at some point as a weeklong event as well as a single meal! So, when we read the accounts we have to strive to understand which use is taking place. 2) The “Feast of Unleavened Bread” was also called the “Passover” (e.g. Lk. 22.1). Here’s the timeline:

· Day 1 of Passover, Nisan 14, is the Feast of Unleavened Bread. That afternoon/evening (3pm-6pm), as all four Gospel accounts note, Jesus ate a meal with His disciples (Lk. 22.7-16, Jn. 13.1-2, Mt. 26.17-21, Mk. 14.12-8).

· Day 2 of Passover, Nisan 15—Preparation Day—begins (according to Jewish time) around the time Jesus and his followers finished eating, that is, some time between 6 and 9pm. (Remember, Jewish days were reckoned quite differently than our days are now. Instead of their days ending at 11:59/Midnight, they considered the end of the day pretty much when the sun fell.) So, Nisan 15 begins between 6-9pm and will end on Nisan 16 around the same time. Still on day two of Passover, we find that all of the Gospel accounts tell different aspects of Jesus’ arrest, trial, crucifixion and resurrection. If I were to offer a timetable of events for Day 2, as to how the Gospels portray them, here’s what I’d offer:

o 1st watch of the night: Jesus and disciples finish the diner (6-9pm: Jn. 13.1-5)
o 2nd watch of the night: After dinner Judas takes off (9pm-12am: Jn. 13.29)
o 3rd watch of the night: Peter denies Jesus (12am-3am: Jn. 18.27-34; Mt. 27.15-35)
o 4th watch of the night: Pilate releases Barabbas on the “Feast Day” (3am – 6am: Mk. 15.6-20; Jn. 18.38-40; Lk. 23.16-25)
o 1st quarter of the day: Jesus given to Pilate for crucifixion around the “sixth hour” (6am – 9am: Jn. 19.12-16)
o 2nd quarter of the day: Jesus dies on “Preparation Day” (9am-12pm: Lk. 23.50-6)
o 3rd quarter of the day: Joseph of Arimathea goes for Jesus’ body (12pm – 3pm: Mk. 15.42-7)
o 4th quarter of the day: Jesus’ body is laid in the tomb on “Preparation Day” (3pm – 6pm: Jn. 19.41-2)

· Day 3 of Passover: On this day, Nisan 16, which is the 7th day of the week and thus the Sabbath, begins around 6pm – 9pm. All four Gospel accounts speak of this day and have nothing major take place on it (see: Lk. 23.55-6; Jn. 19.28-31; Mt. 27.62-3; Mk. 16.1-2). Note that nothing happens until, as Mk. 16.1-2 says, the “Sabbath had passed”!

· Day 4 of Passover, Nisan 17, which his the first day of the week is the day the tomb has visitors and that Jesus’ body is gone. The Gospel accounts all attest, numerous times, that on the “third day” (that is, after He was killed), He was raised, which was also the first day of the next week. See: Mt. 16, 17, 20 and 28; Mk. 9, 10 and 16; Lk. 9, 18, 24; Jn. 20. Also, see Acts 10.

I should note here that there is no “inerrantist” doctrine undergirding or driving my views here. Neither is there a maximalist mentality that is fueling me. Likewise there is no “evangelical” agenda hidden or embedded in what I’ve offered here. While many will resort to such labeling, I will argue that it is simply fictitious. All I’ve attempted to do here is to take the Gospel accounts at face value, in accord with how time was understood and reckoned in the NT and explain what’s said. Everything pans out smoothly and comports well. There is no need to resort to literary, theological or philosophical theories. As I’ve shown, there is a simple way to understand it all (one has to wonder whether or not scholarship has purposefully made this issue harder to understand than is necessary and riddled it with doubt for sheer academic reasons!).

In the end, the accounts are straightforward and pretty self-explanatory—though a little cultural context does need some explaining! As much as some would like for things not to work out this way, the fact is, they do. In my view, there’s no reason to crucify these accounts in the ways that some scholars have. Indeed, we can say with clarity and ease of mind: The Gospels make sense when they talk about the day Jesus was crucified.

*Note: This post has been added to the "Studies in Mark" page mentioned above!