Recent content by rstrats

Nick M, You have a question directed to you in post #10.

What do your comments have to do with Thursday?

OK, that's it. I don't know what's going on here. What I do know is that I'm outa here.

Either you're just messin' with me, or "What we have here is a failure to communicate".

If by "in modern terms" you mean a midnight to midnight calendar day, on which night did the Lord's Supper take place - during the first night of Wednesday or during the second night of Wednesday?

What part of the calendar day are you calling Thursday evening?

Are you using a midnight - to midnight calendar day?

I've got to say that that is the most outside of the box try at explaining the issue that I have heard. But that wouldn't work because it would add up to 4 nights.

How does that explain the lack of a third night?

Ok, since we can't agree on when a calendar day starts with regard to discussions about happenings in the first century, we'll just have to leave it at that. However, I do have a question about one of your comments, i.e., "So that puts Sunday on 16 Nisan, the third day, counting 14 Nisan as...

I understand you. What I don't understand is why you want to observe the goings on of the first century using the nomenclature - as you call it - of during the present time instead of the nomenclature during the time of when they actually happened. But which Thursday night of Thursday - the...

Oh, I am JR. I would like to learn the truth with regard to when the Lord's Supper took place - at the beginning of the calendar day or during the afternoon of the calendar day.

And that is why your point belongs in a different topic.

Because Thursday night 2000 years ago, which is what we are talking about, occupied the first half of the calendar day. This topic is simply asking on what part of Thursday did the Lord's Supper take place.

Actually, it doesn't because the speaker on your link doesn't believe in a Maundy Thursday. This topic is directed to those that do.