Yahoo! News: Last Supper was a day earlier, scientist claims
LONDON (AFP) – Christians have long celebrated Jesus Christ's Last Supper on Maundy Thursday but new research released Monday claims to show it took place on the Wednesday before the crucifixion.
Professor Colin Humphreys, a scientist at the University of Cambridge, believes it is all due to a calendar mix-up -- and asserts his findings strengthen the case for finally introducing a fixed date for Easter.
Humphreys uses a combination of biblical, historical and astronomical research to try to pinpoint the precise nature and timing of Jesus's final meal with his disciples before his death.
Researchers have long been puzzled by an apparent inconsistency in the Bible.
While Matthew, Mark and Luke all say the Last Supper coincided with the start of the Jewish festival of Passover, John claims it took place before Passover.
Humphreys has concluded in a new book, "The Mystery Of The Last Supper", that Jesus -- along with Matthew, Mark and Luke -- may have been using a different calendar to John. ...
Or it could be that John's community was quite happy to play with chronology to make a theological points. Apart from the fact that Jesus was baptised at the beginning of his ministry and died at the end of it, there's little correspondence between the order and timing of events in the Synoptics and John. A difference of one day is of very little consequence when compared to the egregious differences in the rest of the chronology.
The Synoptics were essentially Jewish documents. It made sense for Jesus to be taking part in the Passover meal. John was more concerned to show that Jesus was the Lamb of God, and was thus crucified at the same time that the Paschal lambs were sacrificed in the Temple.
This is an inconsistency, but only a problem for those who take a more literal approach to the Scripture. No mystery here, please move along...!
Posted by: Cameron | Apr 18, 2011 at 04:44 PM
Yes, Cameron, there is more than one theory of what was going on here. I don't need for all the details to square perfectly because the gospels are not "history" in the modern sense, being limited to pure and precise recounting of historical events. Still, it doesn't mean that some things like different calendars might have come into play. Folks with more expertise then I would have to assess this one.
Posted by: Michael W. Kruse | Apr 18, 2011 at 04:50 PM