Bart D. Ehrman - The Bane of Fundies!

[Minimalist]

Ah sorry I misread, I thought you had said the gospels agreed jesus died on the day of preparation for the passover.

The thing is, in mark jesus eats the passover meal with his disciples. However John claims Jesus was sentenced on the day of preparation

John 19:14 "It was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about noon.

“Here is your king,” Pilate said to the Jews. "

So unless you think it took them 18 hours to get around to crucifying him (that is 9am passover day), which certainly isn't indicated by john, the stories still don't match up. I think the important part here is that john's version not only leaves out the passover meal scene, but makes it impossible to happen. John's version does have a last supper, but it is much different than mark's passover meal scene; but I think you already know this.

Sorry for being so late getting back to you on this cdog. Here's Ehrman's answer for the discrepancy between "john" and the others.

I can’t give a full analysis here, but I will point out a signifi cant
feature of John’s Gospel—the last of our Gospels to be written,
probably some twenty-five years or so after Mark’s. John is the only
Gospel that indicates that Jesus is “the lamb of God who takes away
the sins of the world.” This is declared by John the Baptist at the
very beginning of the narrative (John 1:29) and again six verses
later (John 1:35). Why, then, did John—our latest Gospel—change
the day and time when Jesus died? It may be because in John’s
Gospel, Jesus is the Passover Lamb, whose sacrifice brings salvation
from sins. Exactly like the Passover Lamb, Jesus has to die on the
day (the Day of Preparation) and the time (sometime after noon),
when the Passover lambs were being slaughtered in the Temple.
In other words, John has changed a historical datum in order to
make a theological point: Jesus is the sacrificial lamb. And to convey
this theological point, John has had to create a discrepancy between
his account and the others.

In other words, changing the day is a plot device. Plot devices are very common in fictional writing.

---

My point was that while that certainly is an interesting theory, I haven't seen it in a scholarly work, and it seems to be that you are claiming that idea as your own, which would explain it. Please do correct me if I'm wrong.

I wouldn't presume to assume that it is mine, alone. I have not read everything ever written on the subject. I also don't know that I'd dignify it with the word "theory" which has a definitive scientific meaning and one which continually eludes creationists.

I'm merely noting the convergence of coincidences and, as I said above, coincidences make me ill.

BTW, if more theists could discuss/debate as you do I'd be a lot less cranky.