I'm going to read from Matthew 16 and verse 21. From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and the chief priests and scribes and be killed and be raised the third day. Father God It is our desire to glory in your perfect plan, not to question it as Peter was about to question it. It is our desire to take comfort in it, to have faith that when Jesus said it is finished, that it truly is finished. The redemption is completed and it is but for us to receive it. We pray that as we look at some of the plan that you had foreordained, that our hearts would be stirred up with wonder, with amazement, with adoration, and that you would give us faith to live our Christian life as we ought. We continue to worship you as we look into your word. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen. Well, back in 2011, I introduced you to the Thursday theory on the crucifixion of Christ, which is what I hold to. I'm very, very hesitant, as you know, to ever question traditional teachings that the church has held to for many, many centuries. But this is actually one of three theories that the church has held to over time that looks at the last ten days of Christ and tries to reconcile all of the different events. Now you may not be aware of it, but the chronologies of the last ten days of Christ's life here on earth is one of the more perplexing chronologies that theologians have had to wrap their heads around. And of course, I love challenges like this. This is not something that I shun from. And yet I usually hesitate bringing you some of the details of my work that goes behind the scene when I'm bringing the scriptures. But I made an exception to that back in 2011. And I'm going to make another stab at showing this to you today because I think it really is an important concept. And by the end of the sermon, I hope that it will make your heart really sing praises to God and stand in awe and amazement at what He planned. So rather than starting my series on the book of Revelation today and then stopping for four weeks, I thought what I would do is today I'm gonna give an overview the Passion Week. The next week I'm going to be looking at the victory of Christ. We're going to be singing about that victory. We're going to be teaching on it on Palm Sunday. And then on Resurrection Day, I'm going to be looking at how Christ's resurrection actually was the beginning of making all things new. And this is a process that will continue until he makes a new heavens and a new earth. And then I'm going to take two weeks off. These are going to be my two annual writing weeks. And so it made a whole lot more sense to me to wait till after that before we started with the Revelation series. I know some of you are going to be bummed out, disappointed on that. But this morning you're going to have to put your thinking caps on. I've tried to make it a little bit easier for you and I duplicated a chart that I made back in 2011. This is pages 3 and 4 that I think should help you to at least understand a lot of what we're going to be going through today. And it's a scorecard that helps you to see which of three theories can answer all of the controverted issues that are presented to us in the Gospels. The passage that we just read says that Jesus must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things. And we're going to be looking at some of those many things that have perplexed various scholars. And I have the presupposition that there is a divine must behind every detail of that last week. He went according to a plan. In fact, he went as a victor. He knew exactly every part of this plan that he was going to be going in. He climbed that cross, not as a victim, but as a victor to achieve our salvation. But if any one detail in that Passion Week is missing, it messes everything up. Mark 14 verse 2 says that the Pharisees didn't actually want to kill Jesus until after the festival was over and after all of the crowds had gone home. And the reason given is they didn't want to start a riot. And you can understand it would be a riot. Jesus was pretty popular. back in those days, but Jesus had to go through every single day of the next 10 days in order to fulfill the prophecies that have been given over the last 1,500 plus years. Luke says that he went as it had been determined, and verse 27 of that same chapter says that there was an hour in which he would be glorified. Mark 13, one speaks of an hour in which he should leave the world. And so everything in that Passion Week was timed down to the hour. In fact, you're gonna be seeing as we go through some of these things, it was timed down to the minute in some of the cases, and it sends shivers up and down my spine when I look at the Passion Week and see the incredibly intricate way in which God wove these events together. And so I hope you stand in awe of God's planned redemption as I do by the end of this service. Now here's the thing, Satan tries to spoil everything beautiful in the Scriptures. Satan goes on the attack against anything that is important, starting with Genesis chapter 1 and moving on through the Bible. And the timing of the Passion Week has come under incredible attack by unbelievers. It has been the timing of the events in the last 10 days of Christ's life that has led many believers to have doubts about the inerrancy of Scripture. It has been the timing of the Passion Week that has led pastors like Dan Barker to become atheists. Now I don't for a moment buy the idea. He says it was because of these supposed contradictions. that he became an atheist, I think there was a lot more going on in his wicked heart than just bad thinking. Now he didn't have bad thinking, we're going to correct some of that thinking, but there was a lot more to it than that. But it did bother me when Dan Barker could say that he went to his evangelical pastor friends and he asked them about these contradictions that were troubling him and not a one of them was able to give an answer to the questions that he had. It's a very, very important issue and many evangelicals are wavering on it. Here's how one evangelical commentator, John Wenham, words it. Now, it so happens that the story of Jesus' resurrection is told by five different writers whose accounts differ from each other to an astonishing degree. Now, this is an evangelical writer here, okay? He says, the accounts differ from each other to an astonishing degree, so much so that distinguished scholars, one after another, have said categorically that the five accounts, Paul's included, are irreconcilable. Going back to the last century, the great radical P.W. Schmidl said, the Gospels exhibit contradictions of the most glaring kind. Ramirez enumerated ten contradictions, but in reality their number is much greater. Even the doughty conservative Henry Alford wrote, Of all harmonies, those of the incidence of these chapters are to me the most unsatisfactory. They seem to me to weaken instead of strengthening the evidence. I have abandoned all idea of harmonizing throughout. I know that's not a very cheerful way to start a sermon, but I am very cheerful about the Passion Week. I have read every argument that atheists and liberals have brought against these chapters, and I think they are not only reconcilable, they stand out in awesome detail, all of the details working out very, very perfectly. And I want to begin by mentioning the three theories of the day of Christ's crucifixion. You'll see this on page three of your handout. And so over in this right-hand column over here, you'll see the top of these headings is Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. Those represent the Wednesday crucifixion theory, the Thursday, and the Friday one. So which day was Jesus crucified? Was He crucified on Wednesday? Was He crucified on Thursday? Was He crucified on Friday? Now, if you only read one gospel account, it might seem so simple, and you can understand why the Friday theory would arise, because the gospel says that the next day was going to be the Sabbath. Well, everybody knows the Jewish Sabbath is on Saturday. So if it's the day before the Sabbath, Jesus was crucified on Friday. He lies in the grave on Saturday. He rises on Sunday. What's the big deal? It seems like that's a fairly straightforward theory to hold to. So what's the problem? Well, all down through history, theologians who have wrestled deeply with the text have metaphorically torn their hair out trying to reconcile a Friday crucifixion with dozens and dozens of details that you will find in the Gospels. If you hold to a Friday crucifixion, it messes up the number of days that the Gospels count down from Nisan 10 until the resurrection. It messes up Palm Sunday and makes it Palm Monday, unless you insert a day into the Gospel records which makes its own problems and which liberals obviously criticize, that's a desperate measure. If you hold to the version of the Friday theory that has Jesus crucified on the day that the lambs were slain, Nisan 14, then it messes up the year of his death, making it either impossibly early or impossibly late. Now, if you believe that he was crucified in 30 AD, which almost all scholars nowadays hold to, I hold to that as well, 30 AD, then it completely messes up other parts of the week if you say that he was crucified on Friday. It messes up the prophetic significance of the time when the lambs are set apart, his presentation at the temple, his anointing. But if he died a day later on Nisan 15, as some newer scholars who are trying to defend the Friday theory have said, well, it must not be 14, it must have been, he was crucified on Nisan 15, then the specific Passover meal that he ate had lamb in it, something that the gospel seemed to deny and something that actually messes up the institution of the Lord's Supper. which is a meatless meal. It also keeps Christ from fulfilling the Passover calendar timing of dying exactly when the lambs, the temple lambs were slain. Now I will hasten to say if you look at that chart you'll see there are other things that the Friday theory gets right that the Wednesday theory does not get right. But as I painstakingly reevaluated all theories that have historically been held by the church, I came to once again appreciate the incredible beauty and symmetry that happens when you hold to a Thursday crucifixion that happened in 30 AD. A few years ago, Time Life Magazine had a fairly lengthy article that was showing all of the contradictions that occur in the Passion Week narrative. Now, they were assuming a Friday crucifixion, but it's interesting, as you read through that Time Life Magazine, you realize, well, that's not a problem, that's not a problem. All the way through, all of these problems evaporate, if you hold to a Thursday resurrection theory. And so there's going to be two points to the sermon this morning. The first point answers the question of what day Jesus died on. And then the second point, I'm going to give an overview of the incredibly beautiful symmetry that happens if you answer that first question correctly. Now don't think that this is just Phil Kaiser doing a con job on you and trying to get you to believe that chronologies are not boring. This is not just an egghead sermon. This is a sermon which every one of you are going to come away with and I think you're going to stand in awe of God's redemptive purposes. Now he said that he went as it was determined. It says he must suffer many things. And when he said many things, he was not exaggerating at all. There are over 100 Old Testament prophecies that had to be fulfilled. And Jesus did so in a way that would begin to turn the world upside down. But if I don't deal first with the issue on what day He's crucified on, I think you'll miss a lot of those fabulous, fabulous details. So let me start by describing one of the problems. The liberals have repeatedly objected that Matthew 27 verse 63 Mark 8 31 and John 2 verse 19 all say that Jesus would be in the grave for three days and yet on the Friday theory Jesus was in the grave for a maximum of of 39 hours, and it would have been much less time than that that he was actually in the grave. He would have been dead 39 hours. And let me just count that for you from 3 p.m. on Friday, which is when everybody agrees he died, 3 p.m. on Friday to 3 p.m. on Saturday is 24 hours, 3 p.m. on Saturday to 6 a.m. on Sunday morning, which is the absolute latest that Christ could have risen from the dead, is another 15 hours. You add those two together, And you come up with 39 hours, which liberals say, you know, it's a tad bit short of 72 hours. And they scoff. They say the Bible is wrong. He was not in the grave for three days. Now, actually, this objection has been fairly easily answered by those who hold to the traditional Friday theory. And I think sometimes the Wednesday advocates and the Thursday advocates have been unfair. They've been unfair in their criticisms of the Friday theory. You see, in Jewish counting, Days were usually numbered inclusively counting the first day and the last day. So three days does not have to mean three 24-hour periods starting with when he was buried as the Wednesday theory claims. It can mean any period of time that runs over those three calendar days. So part of Friday, part of Saturday, part of Sunday constitutes three days. So the first objection really is not a legitimate objection at all. And if that was the only objection, I would not even be preaching the sermon today. But if you look at Matthew 12 and verse 40, There is one scripture that the Friday theory simply cannot answer with regard to those three days. And actually if you turn to page three, this is the first column, not column, the first row up on that chart up there. Now I've looked at every imaginable defense of the Friday theory and it simply will not work. Matthew 12 verse 40, Jesus said, for as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Now that's different than saying three days. There has to be at least some portion of three daylight periods, some portion of at least three nighttime periods for this to work. Now since John chapter 20 and verse 1 says that Jesus rose from the grave before it became light, while it was still dark, there's no daylight period on Sunday where that will work. So that means that on the Friday theory, Jesus would only have been in the grave a small portion of Friday daylight, all of Saturday's daylight. So there's two days. He would have been in the grave Friday night and Saturday night. That's two full nights. So even counting inclusively, you only get two days and two nights. And let me just explain the difference between counting inclusively or counting exclusively. You're digging fence posts, and you've got a job of putting in a fence along a road, and it's 1,000 feet long, and you're wanting to put these posts all through there every 20 feet or so. How many fence posts are you gonna buy? Well, you say, that's easy. You divide 20 into 1,000, you come up with 50 fence posts. But if you only bought 50 fence posts, you'd be one short, right? Some of the mathematicians here are immediately nodding their heads. Because you need to count the first fence post and the last fence post. That's counting inclusively. And we do this all the time. We count inclusively all the time. Nothing strange about it whatsoever. Now, on calendars, you can do the same thing. You can count the start date or you can leave it out. That's been true in ancient times. That's been true all the time now today. For example, if I were to say, you know, okay, it's Sunday, and I say, yeah, in a couple of days, I'm gonna be leaving for Illinois, you'd probably think I'm gonna be leaving for Illinois on Tuesday. And you'd be right, because we Westerners, we tend to talk that day. And that's counting exclusively. And both ways of counting are legitimate. Here's the point. Almost all of the mistakes, the so-called mistakes that people talk about are simply the difference between counting inclusively and counting exclusively. One is not right and the other wrong. They're just different ways of counting the same thing. By the way, if you need a great article that can show you how this all works go to Wikipedia and just look up inclusive counting they've got all kinds of examples of how we use it in the ancient world we use it in the modern world both ways exclusively inclusively okay so on the Wednesday theory they try to answer the liberal by saying that Jesus was crucified on Wednesday and was in the grave three full 24 hour periods adding up to exactly 72 hours. Now of course they have to say that Jesus rose on Saturday not on Sunday or it does not work. They have to say that. But aside from that problem, which is, as far as I'm concerned, a major problem, aside from that, there is a certain logic to their position. They are counting exclusively. And that's very legitimate if the text calls for it. Now, unfortunately, it creates its own set of problems. If you take a look at the chart on pages 3 and 4, you'll see that I've given either check marks, which means they've passed the test, or I've got an X where they failed the test, and you'll see the Wednesday theory scores only nine out of a possible 20, but that's better than the Friday theory, which scores six out of 20. We are going for broke, okay? We want to score 100%. And I'm not gonna go through the whole chart this morning, but I want to go through enough of it that you can see what this scoreboard is all about. How does the Thursday theory match up on scoreboard number one? Three days and three nights. Well if you go to page one of this chart, bottom left hand side, you will see a little visual here, a little graphic that I have done up for you. And I've done this because it's really hard to wrap your days around counting with our time, which begins at midnight, and with Jewish time, which begins at six o'clock in the evening. So I've put it where the black portions are the nighttime periods and the white portions are the daytime periods. And if you look there, you'll see there are three daytime periods, three nighttime periods in 30 AD. If you hold to a Thursday crucifixion, unlike the Friday theory where Jesus was in the grave parts of two days and two nights on the Thursday crucifixion, he was in the grave three days and three nights. Okay. Now, if you take a look back at point two on the scoreboard, this is page three. Does it meet the second criteria of the sequence of days? The sequence being three days and three nights, not three nights and three days. Okay, starting with days. And yes it does. Jesus was clearly put into the grave partway through You know, he died at 3 p.m., but he was put into the grave before the Sabbath began, which means before 6 o'clock. So he was in the grave while there was still daylight around. And actually, because the text is talking about his soul being in Sheol, you gotta really count from 3 p.m. and on. And so, very, very clearly, he was starting this sequence as a daylight period of time. Now contrast that with the Wednesday theory. which insists that Jesus was put into the grave after twilight and once the Sabbath had begun. So their sequence is three nights and three days. Now that's just a tiny point, but I bring it up because they pride themselves in being so accurate down to the minute, down to the hour. I believe in being accurate down to the minute and the hour as well, but I'm just pointing out this is actually not following strictly the way the text is worded. The third point on the scorecard is Mark 8, verse 31. It says that Jesus would be killed and after three days rise again. Now that after, that word after, creates a huge problem for both Wednesday and the Friday theories. The Wednesday theory bases its entire system of accounting on exclusive, that exclusive counting is the only way that you can do it. In fact there's not even a reason to believe in the Wednesday theory if you don't think that exclusive counting is the only way that you can count. But it also rules out the Friday system, which clearly cannot account for the resurrection being after three days on any form of counting. They try to make the after refer to, well, it was after he was captured, after his interrogation and his kangaroo court trial. That's not what the text says. It is starting the counting after he is killed, after his death, not after his interrogation. Now, Jesus was buried late on Friday afternoon. Sunday is not after three days, no matter how you slice it. On the Thursday, theory it is. You got Thursday, Friday, Saturday, And after that comes. Sunday, right? So counting inclusively, you can. So it's a very natural mode of counting. Now let's move on. Liberals bring up the objection that one verse says he was raised within three days, and another verse says he was raised after three days. Uh-oh. Boy, that seems like a straight out contradiction. You can't have it both ways. It's either within those three days or it's after those three days. And at first, it does seem like it's a contradiction. But I would tell these liberals that they're just not asking the text the right question. You know, if they ask the text, well, first of all, is it really credible to say that Mark, as intelligent as Mark was, that he would make such a blatant contradiction within 37 verses? I don't think that's very credible. But the text, the thing that they should be asking the text is who is speaking and to whom are these words being spoken? And I want to address that because it's very, very important. If you look at the speakers in the audience, it all gets cleared up. Mark himself says, after three days in Mark 8, verse 31, yet he very correctly records Jesus as saying that he would rise on the third day in Mark 9, 31. Two different people speaking to two different audiences. So Jesus was talking to Jews who tended most of the time to assume inclusive counting. And Mark is speaking to Gentiles who tended to assume exclusive counting. Okay, and it's interesting that Mark did not change Christ's words, even if it might have been confusing to a Roman reader, he very accurately records exactly what Jesus said, and then he turns around and he explains to the Gentiles what this meant in terms of exclusive counting. Far from being accurate, this is accuracy down to the nth degree. He wants to accurately quote Jesus, he wants to accurately communicate what Jesus meant. Now, both the Wednesday and the Friday theories fail to account for these different ways of wording things. It's not just a perceived contradiction, it is a real contradiction on either the Wednesday or the Friday theories. And the problem with both of those theories is that they insist that the scripture can only count one way. And I ask, why? That's a rather arbitrary rule. Did you get that from the scripture? Did you impose that on the scripture? It's very arbitrary to say that. Several Friday Theory papers that I have read have insisted that inclusive counting is Hebrew. And what's the Bible? It's a Hebrew Bible, right? So let's use inclusive counting. And that Westerners, they think in terms of exclusive counting. And generally speaking, that is true. But on the fence post illustration, I showed how Westerners routinely use inclusive counting too. On the other hand, I read one Wednesday advocate say, quote, I can't think of a single example of inclusive counting in the scripture, unquote. That is patently ridiculous. There are so many that are unquestionably inclusive. I'll just give you one. Luke 13, verse 32. Jesus said, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow and the third day I shall be resurrected. I mean his inclusive counting very explicitly includes today. His counting explicitly includes today and when you include today it's always inclusive counting. So are you beginning to understand the difference between those two? Now both systems of counting were used in the Old Testament and the New Testament just as both systems of counting are used today. But the Hebrews tended to assume inclusive counting when you talk to them and the Thursday theory and the Friday theory bank on that. Whereas the Romans tended to assume exclusive counting and the Wednesday theory banks on that and they over-apply it. So the bottom line is that it makes sense that Mark would accurately record Christ's inclusive counting that had been spoken to Jews and then turn around and explain what that meant to the Romans that he was writing to with exclusive counting. Neither a Jew nor a Roman would be confused by either approach because they both did use both. But if you take an either-or false dichotomy to this counting, you simply will not be able to reconcile the phrases that I've put there in your outline. Mostly it's using inclusive language. But it makes sense for Mark and Luke to interpret what was meant to the Gentile audiences. Now the fifth point is that the Friday theory messes up a big chunk of the prophetic calendar. It didn't used to. It didn't used to. Scholars used to be unaware of some of the implications of the dates. And Edersheim tried to rescue a Friday theory by having Jesus crucified in 34 AD. And given the fact that Edersheim didn't have a computer and he's calculating back, it is astonishing that he was only off by one day. He was a brilliant guy, very much respect Alfred Edersheim. Hey, but if you're off by one day, it messes everything up. And so everyone who has used a computer calendar program agrees, he was off by one day, he was wrong. So if you're using Alfred Edersheim to try to defend a Friday theory, you've got outdated information. That's the point I want you to understand. Once computer calculations of lunar cycles began to happen in 1973 and following, everybody knew Alfred Edersheim miscalculated 34 AD simply will not work for the date of Christ's death. A lot of other problems with a 33 or a 34 AD date, too. So that most scholars, as I've already mentioned, are convinced, absolutely convinced, Jesus died in 30 AD, no matter what problems that this might pose. And I, too, hold to a 30 AD date. I think it's pretty solid. So that's forced a lot of new thinking, and I've had to read a ton of new papers by Friday advocates that say, okay, he was crucified in 30 AD, let's still try to fix the Friday theory. So instead of saying he was crucified on Nisan 14, they say he was crucified the next day, on the 15th. Now while it solves some problems, It opens up a plethora of other problems. One of the problems is that nice and 15 the day that they're now saying he was crucified on was a high Sabbath. One of the most important Sabbaths in the year, and it's utterly inconsistent with the non sabbatarian activities that these legalistic Jews were engaging in on that day. In fact, I want you to turn with me to John chapter 19. We're going to look at a few scriptures here that I think will help you to. to understand what we're saying. John 19, verse 31, Therefore, because it was the preparation day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath, for that Sabbath was a high day. So he's explaining, this is not your normal weekly Sabbath. That Sabbath was a high day. The Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away. Now, the key thing to note is that these legalistic Jews didn't want these victims hanging on a cross on the Sabbath. And yet the Friday theory advocates who have been forced to say, yes, he's crucified in 30 A.D., they have us believe that the Jews are talking about the weekly Sabbath on Saturday But they have no problem working on the Passover Sabbath the day before on Friday. But if you look at how the Jews treated the Passover Sabbath, that is simply not credible. A Sabbath was a Sabbath and you just didn't do those kinds of things back in those days. In fact, it was illegal to do those things in Israel. But even if it were okay for them to do all of this work on the Passover Sabbath, it's simply not what the text says. Look at verse 42. So there they laid Jesus because of the Jews preparation day for the tomb was nearby. The preparation day was where you got all of the work done so that you could keep the Sabbath. And they're in a real hurry. They don't have much more time because the Sabbath is almost upon them. Now the modern Friday theory people who are trying to rescue the theory, they say this is the weekly Sabbath not the festival Passover Sabbath. Well that simply is not true. Take a look at verse 14. Now it was the preparation day of the Passover OK, this is not the preparation day for the weekly Sabbath. This was the preparation day for the Passover Sabbath, which was one of seven high Sabbaths in the year. And of course, verse 31 calls this particular Sabbath a high day. So there's no way that they could have done the kind of work that they were doing on this high Sabbath. So that means this, the day after Christ was crucified was clearly Nisan 15. There goes the Friday theory. If you look at the Jewish calendar for 30 AD, you will find that Nisan 14 was Thursday. Nisan 15 was a Friday, Nisan 16 was a Saturday. It is inconceivable that Judas could be thought to go out and buy stuff on the Sabbath. That's scoreboard number 8, okay, if you're looking at your chart. Where is he going to buy anything? All the stores are closed. In Israel, it was illegal to have a store open on the Sabbath, so where is he going to buy anything? Likewise, it's inconceivable that Nicodemus would be willing to buy linen on the Sabbath. He was a Pharisee, right? So where is he going to buy things on the Sabbath? And would he even be willing to buy things on the Sabbath? That's on Nisan 15, let alone who's going to sell him stuff that the linen on the Sabbath. So that's scoreboard number nine. If you are off by one day, it's like dominoes. Everything falls apart. Now one other interesting note is that both Matthew and Mark speak of more than one Sabbath prior to Sunday. It's very interesting. None of the Gospels speak of more than one day of preparation. You get that? They speak of more than one Sabbath, but they do not speak of more than one day of preparation. That means that the Sabbaths were back-to-back, which only happened in 30 AD. 30 AD, Friday was the Passover high day Sabbath, Saturday was the weekly Sabbath, so the day of preparation had to be Thursday. John makes clear that Christ was crucified on the preparation day of Passover. So point number seven argues against the Wednesday theory too, since there is no evidence that there were two days of preparation. One on Wednesday, and another on Friday. If the Wednesday theory were correct, if he were crucified even in a different year, both Wednesday and Friday should have been called days of preparation. And this strongly suggests that the two Sabbaths were not separated by non-Sabbath Friday. They were back to back. And of course in 30 AD the two Sabbaths were back to back. I've just mentioned that. Friday was the 15th. High Sabbath, Saturday obviously the regular Sabbath. And you'd only need one day of preparation for both. Now the late James Montgomery Boyce says of these two Sabbaths, Matthew's account of the events of the resurrection morning begins, in the end of the Sabbaths, plural, As it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Matthew 28 verse 1, the plural Sabbath has been a puzzle to many commentators and translators who usually change it to the singular Sabbath. But the plural is completely explained if there were actually two Sabbaths, the Friday Passover Sabbath and the Saturday Sabbath back to back. Now let me try to wind down this first section here. If the Thursday crucifixion is correct, it makes a huge difference. It means that Jesus partook of the first Passover meal on Nisan 14, not the lamb Passover meal of Nisan 15. And if you're trying to follow along, we've backed up a little bit to point number five on your scoreboard. If Jesus ate the Passover meal on Wednesday evening at the beginning of Nisan 14, as I believe, he ate a meatless meal. The whole meal was a ceremony with bread and wine, and the lambs would be slain about eight hours later on the same day, Nisan 14. then that lamb would be eaten on Nisan 15 just after 6 p.m. when the Jewish day would begin same bread and wine was eaten on both days but on Nisan 15 the lamb was the focus not the bread and as we'll see in a moment Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper with bread and wine alone because the next day he was to be the final lamb he did not want competition he certainly did not want to permanently institutionalize meat and blood From here on in, the bread was only to symbolize the flesh, the wine to symbolize the blood, just as water baptism replaced the bloody symbol of circumcision. So there were to be no more sacrifices once Jesus' sacrifice was completed. Now here are some other things that would be messed up if you ignore the problems with AD 26 and 33, and they're pretty substantial, and you say, okay, Jesus was crucified on Nisan 14. First, you have a Palm Monday instead of a Palm Sunday, so you're not supporting tradition anyway, and it totally messes up the order of the week. Now, the reason I even mention tradition is because that's the strongest argument in favor of the Friday theory, is that the church traditionally has held that this was a Friday crucifixion. Well, my point is, if you hold to a Friday crucifixion, automatically you've got a, instead of a, a Palm Sunday, you've got a Palm Monday. So if you look at the very last category on page four, very last row there, what I point out is that not one of these three traditions, one of these three theories completely keeps the traditional Passion Week order. Okay, so in other words, It's really not that strong of an argument. Now there's another problem with the newer Friday theory. You find that Jesus didn't die at the time that the lambs die. He still is not in the tomb three days and three nights and there are other problems for both Wednesday and Friday. On a 26 A.D. or a 33 A.D. dating, the lambs would be slain two hours earlier than Jesus died, and the darkness would come two hours too late to stop the temple preparations for such sacrifices. It was uniquely on this year, when there's two Sabbaths back to back, that the Jewish law mandated that the sacrifice be made at 3 p.m. rather than at 1 p.m. OK, and there's a whole pile of more evidence that I won't go into this morning. That Thursday fits the timing for a new covenant institution, a new calendar and focuses so exquisitely on Jesus that it's my prediction that in a few decades I think most evangelicals are going to be. holding to a Thursday resurrection theory. I may be wrong on that, but there's already many Friday theory advocates who have written, published on this, who have been convinced by the evidence in all of the calendar programs, this is unsustainable, they've switched to a Thursday theory. Ernest Martin is one of them. Ernest Martin used to write vigorously in defense of the Friday theory, and he is so blown away by the evidence, he's got one of the best arguments, I think, for a Thursday theory. Now, I'm not gonna bore you with the other 14 points, but what they do, if you study through them, is they progressively build a case for a Thursday crucifixion. And I've just given it to you, so you'll have, you know, if you wanna study it more, somebody has questions about it, you can say, here, I've got a copy that you can look at. But what I wanna do now is I wanna look at the beauty of Passion Week as it was supposed to look. There is an incredible symmetry if you hold to a Thursday crucifixion. And I actually brought out some of these points a few years ago. Ten days before Christ was crucified, He was anointed for oil for His burial on the very day that the Passover lambs were marked and consecrated for death. And it was in the same area as well. Over the next ten days those lambs had to be seen and they had to be examined every single day to make sure that no blemishes came up. And of course, every day of the next 10 days is accounted for on a Thursday interpretation. Jesus was seen, and even though He was accused of sin, He says, none of you have been able to show any sin in me. He was found to be a lamb without any blemish. In contrast, on the Friday interpretation, there is one missing day. And actually, most people say there's two missing days because of the way they use the text. I don't have time to get into that. Then there is the triumphal entry on Nisan 10. Why does Jesus walk to the temple? Well that was the day in which the lambs were herded to the temple. Josephus says that on any given year there was around 250,000 lambs that were being crowded through the streets moving to the temple. And they would be then examined by the priests. They had already been examined in another place. And so here is Jesus walking in the midst of these 250,000 lambs to the temple where they are to examine Him once again. And yet they cannot find any blemish in Him. He finds blemish in them. He cleanses them out of the temple. He does not want any priest to be able to say, It is legitimate for me to continue to offer up these Passover lambs. He was the final lamb. And anyway, when you just picture Him walking these crowds, I mean, it just makes me choke up when I think about it. And you see the emotion in Christ's words in John chapter 12. The whole story makes all the difference in the world, how you interpret the emotion. in his words. Don't tell me that chronologies are unimportant. They are very, very important. He was fulfilling prophecy in perfect synchronization with the festival rituals. Now, if you look at the chart on Passover meaning, and this is on page 2, you will see that it all perfectly pointed to Jesus. And I'm just going to race through this. Just look at the second column over there. I'm just going to race through it very, very quickly. You can study it on your own. He was the Lamb of God. He was a Lamb without blemish. He was in His prime. He was anointed four days before His Passover. He was crucified on the 14th. Just as all Israel had to kill the Lamb in Exodus 12, verse 6, all Israel is accused of killing Jesus in the Gospels, by the way, just as you and I did with our sins. Just as the blood of the Lamb was applied to the doorposts, Scripture says that the blood of Christ must be applied to our lives, and that it protects us from the destruction of God. It is a household redemption, just as Christ redeemed entire households. And you know the Scriptures, so many Scriptures, Acts 3, verse 25, it talks about Jesus blessing all the families of the earth. So the New Covenant continues to be a family covenant. Just as blood was applied on the threshold and those who stepped over that threshold were leaving Egypt symbolically Committing themselves to the Lord and to his new kingdom We do the same today and when we refuse to do so we want to leave the church We want to go into the world Hebrews 10 verse 29 says Of how much worse punishment do you suppose will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified or set apart a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? So if we go back over that threshold, We are trampling on Christ's blood. Just as they had to stay inside the home to be protected in Exodus 12, we must remain in Christ's household to be spared, according to Hebrews. Just as they had to partake of the lamb, so we have to partake of Jesus. Just as they had to eat all of the lamb, John 6 says to the complainers, look, you can't pick and choose which parts of me you're going to take. You have to take all of me. They wanted to take Christ as a provider of bread, you know, and say, yeah, yeah, we'll take that kind of a king. But they did not want to submit to Jesus as Lord or Jesus as Savior from their sins. And Jesus said, hey, if you don't take all of me, if you're offended with any of me, you don't have salvation. Just as it was roasted with fire, Christ suffered under the fire of God's judgment. Just as it had to be eaten immediately, Scripture says that today is the day of salvation. Now is the acceptable time to receive Christ. Just as bitter herbs were eaten in remembrance of their sufferings in Egypt, Christ redeems us from the bitterness of sin. I mean, think about that. He did not die to make us comfortable in our sins. He died to redeem us from bondage and bitterness in Egypt. He wants us to be holy. Just as what was left over of the lamb had to be burned and none of it left for any stranger, Christ's redemption is effective for the elect alone. Jesus said, I pray for them. I do not pray for the world, but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours. Not one bit of the Passover lamb could be eaten by those outside of the covenant. That's why Revelation 5.19 says that he is redeemed to himself out of every tribe and nation to be a people. Now, his atonement is sufficient to convert this world and every other world, if there were other worlds. But what was it intended for? It was intended for the covenant people. John 19, okay, just as not one bone of the lamb could be broken, John 19 says that this was a prophecy that not one bone of Christ could be broken. Just as the Passover had to be eaten with haste, we're admonished by Jesus to be ready to forsake all and follow Him. Just as they fled from Egypt upon eating the lamb, we are called to flee from the wrath to come. Just as Egypt was judged by the death angel, those not redeemed will be judged. Just as there was no leaven in the Passover meal, Christ dealt once and for all with the leaven of sin and replaced it with the leaven of the kingdom. By the way, some people assume that leaven only applies to sin. That's not true. There's the leaven of the Pharisees' teaching. There's the leaven of the kingdom. There's the leaven of sin. It just symbolizes growth. So what happened here is that the leaven of Passover is put away so that the leaven of Pentecost can be partaken of. The leaven of sin is dealt with by Jesus so that the leaven of the kingdom can begin to grow in the new covenant. That's the symbolism. That's why we partake of leavened bread. You didn't realize crackers had leaven in it, right? Well, it does. It might be fun occasionally to have these big loaves if we could find somebody that could cook really cool leavened bread. But the reason we use leaven is again because of the symbolism of Pentecost. I'll come back to some events in a moment, but there is a significance to the timing when Christ was nailed to the cross as well as the darkness from noon to three o'clock, which is three hours of darkness. Those were the precise hours when preparations would have been made in the temple from 12 o'clock to 3 o'clock so that they would be ready to efficiently sacrifice the over 250,000 lambs that had to be slain between 3 o'clock and 5 o'clock. They had to end at 5 to give people enough time to go home, roast it, and not violate the Sabbath. which started at 6 p.m. That's a lot of lambs to get prepared from noon to 3 and then to be slain from 3 to 5. And Josephus indicates that on a typical Passover almost 3 million people came to Jerusalem from all around the world. Now not all of them had to be at the temple, because one lamb could feed ten people. Josephus says it was usually around, sometimes more, but usually around 250,000 males who showed up at the temple, crowding through the streets, but were in the temple, lining up, ready to get their their temple land. God wants to make sure that there is a spectacle that the nation of Israel will not be able to deny. Now in order to accommodate the massive crowds the priests had a system all worked out to begin preparations at noon. What happens at noon? Darkness happens, right? Darkness was so thick at noon at the precise moment when they were going to begin their preparations, a thick darkness that light could not penetrate. And there were 250,000 men standing in and around the temple who couldn't move for fear of getting trampled, who have not brought lanterns with them. Why would they bring lanterns in the middle of the day? I mean, they are totally taken by surprise. So God gives them three hours to think about what is happening on this particular Passover. There is no way they could move out of there, and they didn't want to move anyway, they wanted their Passover lamb. So they were a captive audience to one of the world's, well, it was the world's greatest drama. So you're beginning to see some of the excitement that's involved in understanding biblical chronology. They're keys to understanding the text. Then, when they're relieved to finally have the power turned back on at 3 p.m., here's what they would have witnessed, putting all of the different facts together from internal and external sources. And Ernest Martin does a fabulous job on this. According to Josephus, a Roman historian and the Talmud, they would have seen the outside doors to the temple open wide open all on their own. They would have heard a loud voice saying, we are leaving this place. Now that would have been freaky, you know, as the glory cloud leaves the temple, we are leaving this place. They would have felt an earthquake. They would have seen a several ton stone lintel fall to the ground and the curtain that was attached to it falling to the ground. Immediately after that they would have seen the inner curtain, which they've never seen before, being torn from top to bottom. It was very obvious God was tearing that curtain from top to bottom. That was the moment of Christ's death and it was also supposed to be the moment when the first of those temple lambs were slain. But panic ensued and they could not do what they were scheduled to do. Again, God did not want any competition with His final Lamb. Now all of this symbolism is totally messed up on a Friday theory. Well, what captures the vision of the people the moment the lights are turned back on is the Holy of Holies. They can see right down the corridor of that temple into the Holy of Holies witnessing something they would never have dreamed in their wildest imaginations could be possible to see. Thousands of priests witnessed it. Probably tens of thousands out of those 250,000 men were probably positioned in a place within the temple or outside the temple to have been able to see down that corridor right into the Holy of Holies. But certainly there were many priests who saw that. It's no wonder to me that so many priests were converted in Acts chapter 6. They could see God's hand was in this. Anybody who had eyes to see could see that God with His hand was wiping away the sacrificial system. But there was also preparation for the festival of firstfruits. Now firstfruits was on Sunday, but the preparation for it began the day before Jesus was crucified on Wednesday evening. The elders went out and they marked the spot that was to be harvested by binding together the standing grain with rope. Now that was the night that Jesus was bound by the elders of Israel. Guess where the grain was bound? It was bound outside of Jerusalem, over the brook Kidron. Guess where Christ was bound? Outside of Jerusalem, over the brook Kidron, in a garden called Gethsemane. Which, by the way, would have bordered that field. And so the grain was bound on the evening that Jesus was bound. Guess when the grain was cut down? It was the next afternoon, just before the Passover Sabbath began, and announced the start of the Passover Sabbath. And that's when Christ was taken off of the cross. It was almost Sabbath, which is why they had to quickly find a tomb, and they put it into the tomb that was nearby, it says. Now let me read you part of the description of the first fruit's harvest given by the Jewish writer, Alfred Edersheim. When the time for cutting the sheaf had arrived, just as the sun went down, three men, each with a sickle and basket, set to work. Clearly to bring out what was distinctive in the ceremony, they first asked of the bystanders three times each of these questions. Has the sun gone down? With this sickle? Into this basket? On this Sabbath? And lastly, Or first Passover day is what he said, they literally said. And lastly, shall I reap? Having each time been answered in the affirmative, they cut down barley to the amount of one ephah, or about three pecks and three pints of our English measure. Now, when you think about these details, again, God's superintending providence can be clearly seen. It foreshadows the fact that the elders cut off Christ from the land of the living. They agreed to do it on the Passover timing. And they asked the people if they should apply the sickle, and the people agreed. Well, when they agreed on the grain, they also agreed on Christ. They cried out, crucify Him, didn't they? The whole people were applying the sickle to Jesus. Edersheim comments on the irony of the moment as the throng carried that basket of grain away at the very time when Nicodemus and Josephus carried the body of Jesus to a nearby tomb. A noisy throng followed delegates from the Sanhedrin outside the city and across the brook Kidron. It was a very different procession and for a different purpose from the small band of mourners which just about the same time carried the body of the dead Savior from the cross to the Rakhun tomb wherein no man had yet been laying. While the one turned into the garden, perhaps to one side, the other emerged amidst loud demonstrations in a field across Kidron, which had been marked out for that purpose. They were to be engaged in a service most important to them. It was probably to this circumstance that Joseph of Arimathea owed their non-interference with this request for the body of Jesus and Nicodemus and the women that they could go undisturbed about the last sad offices of loving mourners. Now the heavy basket containing the sheaves of grain was carried to the temple, and the grain stayed in the basket for three days and three nights, just as Jesus stayed in the tomb for three days and three nights. Always. On the first Sunday after Passover, the grain was taken out of the basket, it was beaten, it was ground, it was purified, then it was offered up to the Lord as a wave offering. Now the grain is a symbol of Jesus and all of the saints united to Him in His death, burial and resurrection. And just as the grain was ground together so that you could no longer separate any of the kernels, they are together. So too, we are united to Jesus so tightly that we can never be separated. Our participation in His resurrection guarantees our own. The key to your being received by God as a heath offering is by being united to Jesus by faith. It is only those who put their faith in Christ to whom the scripture says, you legally died when Jesus died. You legally were buried when Jesus was buried. You legally were resurrected when he was resurrected. In fact, the rest of our identity does not exist outside of Jesus. He is our identity. We are seated with Christ in the heavenlies right now. That's how tightly we are identified with the Lord Jesus Christ. Now isn't that a marvelous picture that God has given? To me it just sends shivers up and down my spine even while I'm preaching on this. It helps us to appreciate the accuracy and the harmony of Scripture. It helps us to fulfill 1 Peter 3.15 that says we need to be ready to always give an answer of the hope that lies within us. It helps us to answer the doubts of others. It strengthens our faith in the power and the wisdom of God. It helps us to trust God's providence now. I mean, just think about that. If God could so perfectly superintend with His providence over 100 prophecies, during that Passion Week, working even through unbelievers, and how he can do that, I don't know, without sinning, without tempting to sin. He's in no way implicated in the sin, yet he overrules the sin in such a marvelous way. He controlled all of those details. Can you not trust Him to control the details of your life today? I think you need to be able to. No matter what wicked men might do to you, He is up to the task of working all things together for your good today, and we can trust Him. Just as Jesus had a total confidence in God when He said that He was going as it had been determined, We can have the boldness and the confidence that we are going just as it has been determined. You don't need to fear the financial collapse of America even though I'm convinced it's probably coming. You don't need to fear it. You don't need to fear communism. You cannot die one day sooner. then God is determined for you to die. This means you can live by faith. You don't need to live by fear of the circumstances around you. This whole message should cause us to trust God's providence and His grace implicitly. But certainly we should stand in awe and amazement, wonder, adoration at the wisdom and the grace that is displayed in the Passion Week. Now in a moment I'm going to be giving you an opportunity to worship God and say, yes, Lord, I do stand in awe of you. We're going to be singing when I survey the wondrous cross and saying, Lord, I worship you. I love you. I adore you. I praise you for what you have done for me. But let's go to the Lord in prayer. Father God, we do stand in amazement. of how you orchestrated the tiniest details of the Passion Week, all for your glory and for the good of the church. And we thank you. We thank you for the comfort of Christ's words, it is finished. We thank you that redemption is done, the victory is won, that Satan is on the run when the church engages in spiritual warfare by faith. Please give us the faith to lay claim to the spiritual riches that you have blessed us with in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus. Help us to never doubt the truth that if you are for us, no one can stand successfully against us. And if there are any here who see themselves as victims and as defeated, I pray that they would be enabled to so embrace what Jesus purchased for them. that they would become more than conquerors. Help us to not only understand the Passion Week, but to be enriched and to be empowered by its truths. And we pray this in the strong name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. Amen.