The Death of Jesus

The Death of Jesus and the Need to Finish the Synoptic Gospels

We are still in section 347 if you want to turn their page 321 the death of Jesus. Those of you Visiting we have been studying the synoptic Gospels for nearly a decade and we are going to finish. We are going to finish we are only Pages literally, we're on page 321 and it's 330.

We've got 17 pages left to go. That's it. We're gonna make it. And then as we have announced The next major study will be church history again. But what do we have to cover before we do church history?

I Announced it a few weeks ago. Remember Let's see how many people huh? Yeah, one person was awake. Yay. Yeah, we need to. I Mentioned on a Sunday morning that I just Do not have do not possess the skills to in any way shape or form somehow make a sermon Out of a study of slavery.

I just know. There's too much there's too many references to look at too much history, it's just doesn't doesn't fit so we'll need to Work that in there some way. Or we may start the history thing step out of it for a moment.

I don't know but we'll see. It's obviously not an enjoyable, but it is a necessary topic to address at some point. If we're going to continue and finish up our study of the law which we will continue today.

For those of you interested will be in Deuteronomy 19 and 20. So, all right, we'll go ahead and get started. Last week we noted in Matthew 27 mark 15 and Luke 23 the presence of the Centurion. And I mentioned to you at that time The importance of noting him because you will note in section 350 mark 1544 and pilot wondered if you were already dead and he summoned the Centurion and Summoning the Centurion he asked him whether he was already dead and when he learned from the Centurion he was dead.

He granted by to Joseph now only mark makes reference of this which is interesting both Matthew and Luke do not. But mark makes a specific unique reference to the summoning of the Centurion who was in charge of the execution to verify the death of Jesus now obviously.

You know I no one at the time would have been imagining What would be developing in our day, but as I mentioned to you briefly last week? It's amazing. How many conspiracy books are out there? Who that attempt to make the argument that Jesus did not actually die?

And that there are actually some Muslims who've picked up on that and will repeat that the old swoon theory Etc etc but No one simply reading the words that we read last week Yielded up his spirit breathed his last breath his last bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

These are all phrases that without any meaningful question without any doubt would indicate to us the reality of the fact that Jesus had died now. I think there is I think we should recognize that there is a Supernatural element to the timing in other words.

This is not a simple situation where someone is trying to postpone death as long as possible. And then their body just finally gives out Jesus. Gave up his spirit. Matthew says yielded up his spirit. There is a sense in which Jesus is in control of all these things.

But the language is very plain that this is a physical death now. Briefly I suppose I would like to just mention that there are in in many of the debates I'm involved in listening to others debating this issue there is a Struggle on the part of our Muslim friends and a struggle on the part of a lot of Christians To understand the nature of the death of Christ.

The Muslims can have an extremely Shallow objection well if you believe Jesus God, then God died and who is reigning the universe and etc. Etc. There are some who actually? really have that Shallow a level of understanding of the of the topic and hence say you know you you can't explain this.

Even though Muslims themselves do not believe that death means non-existence. The spirit survives death in Islamic theology, so why they assume that there is non-existence from the Christian perspective knowing that we believe the same thing.

I I've not quite figured that out, but that's that's something you'll run into very often and Sometimes when you encounter a really bad objection The flesh wants to mock the bad objection. Remember you can't you cannot assume that the person you're talking to has ever heard a good response a lot of these folks folks come from lands where there aren't too many Christians who really know their stuff and Hence have been able to give them a meaningful response.

So keep that in mind when you respond to that, but there is still a lot of question on the part of a lot of people. What? What did this mean? How does the God man die and? Are you only talking about I'm talking about Jesus who is you know you know the hypostatic Union one person two natures?

How do we understand that how do we understand the relationship? And what is death and so on and so forth and I think it's I think it's important to see that the one person Gave up his life that did not mean that that person ceases to exist.

We don't believe in annihilation, but there was the giving of a perfect life Voluntarily there on the cross it is a real death. That's why there had to be a real incarnation hopefully. We've all given some thought to that over the past couple of days for some strange odd reason.

There had to be a real incarnations. There could be a real giving of a real Physical life, and it was done Voluntarily on the part of the Son of God. He Voluntarily he made himself of no reputation in the incarnation.

He is receives from the father the authority to give up his life to take it back again. These are all biblical phrases that describe for us. What happens here. Jesus gives his life Voluntarily, and he truly does an innocent man who never sinned gives his life.

That's why Substitution can take place, but because he's the God man. It's not just a one-to-one one person type of substitution. But it is considered in the father's sight to be sufficient for all who are united with Jesus Christ.

And so if someone were to ask well What does that mean that he died. Did God die. Well if what you mean by did God die? Did Deity cease to exist. Did see deity become mutable changeable. No of course not.

Did the God man give up his life? Voluntarily. Yes, did he cease to exist. No remember we? Mentioned just a couple weeks ago the issue in Luke 23 Where the Jehovah's Witnesses miss? Punctuate the phrase today.

You will be with me in paradise today. They change it to I tell you today comma you will be in the in paradise. Let's be a way down the road someplace type of a situation. There is a the continued spiritual existence of the human spirit of Christ as.

Well as as well as you know divinity is not cannot die. I mean, it's just just definitional. So it is the giving of life. There is the the death it is purposeful. It is intentional. It is exactly when God intended it to take place.

Which? Deal with it as you as you may. I cannot begin to understand how open theists can actually understand any of this stuff. But this was when God intended this to take place and it is exactly what his intentions.

Were now so we have the centurion verifying these things by the way there is a question. When when the centurion says truly this man was the son of God. The phrase son of God in the original language is an Arthurist.

It does not have an article and so there are some that would argue that a a more contextual translation would be a son of God because I mean a Centurion is is not going to have. At least the assumption is the centurion is not going to have a background in Judaism a background.

To be able to go hey, you know I know there's only one true son of God or something along those lines and and so there are some who translate it in that way. Taking into consideration the background of the centurion, but of course I really doubt that he had been.

You know in in that area for only a few days or something. And so I don't know that you necessarily have to go that direction. But I mentioned it in case you encounter a translation has that It just doesn't have the definite article.

There are some that would say a centurion would say this man was a son of God a godly man. And there were others who would say no. Evidently he had had some encounter with with Judaism had some background whichever it may be.

I just mentioned it for you, so you're not Taken aback by it when when you encounter something like that now notice that both Matthew and Mark record for us the Tearing of the curtain in the temple. Mark simply says the curtain of the temple is torn to from top to bottom.

No more discussion. No more description. Matthew has a section that has especially over the past couple of years become scandalous. How could a passage of scripture become scandalous well? There are many who are Troubled and in in some ways scandalized embarrassed by Matthew's statements in verses 51 through 53.

Not the tearing of the curtain in the temple which to be honest with you is I would say the most miraculous of the events that are narrated there in That particular little section. I think it's when you think about what the curtain in the temple was as You may be as you may know it was a woven structure that was incredibly Weighty and thick it was over a man's Width of the hand mine is a very big hand in thickness woven.

Can you imagine? House how not only how heavy that is but how impossible it is to tear I? Mean did anyone have any issues getting any presents open I mean What is this plastic stuff? You know it's that thick and I'm going at it with knives and scissors and Cutting myself into pieces and it off.

It's You know I love those Amazon things were please rate our packaging for ease of opening it killed me. You know it is this but anyway We make sure it's in plastic you can see it. You just can't have it you know.

So anyway if you think that's tough to get through can you imagine if it's six inches across? Woven fabric, I mean this was a Massively heavy structure and of course we understand the symbolism of it.

We understand the idea of it being the Representation of what separates the people from the presence of God and and the tearing of that, but isn't it fascinating? That you have just this this tantalizing little statement in verse 38 of Mark.

There's no expansion. There's no discussion of it There you know I think that's what lies in the background of the discussion in Hebrews or in Hebrews. His what what is the veil in Hebrews? Remember, what does it like into it's like into his flesh?

So at the breaking of his flesh becomes synonymous with the with the tearing of the veil and and so that we have an Anchor that goes into the holy place a sure hope which is Jesus who has gone into that holy place for us these are all tied together and It is just simply mentioned by Mark and by Matthew.

No no theological explanation is added. Other than both say from top to bottom because how would how would men do it? The only way men could do it would be from bottom to top. So it's on the top the bottom.

It's it's it is indicated to be a divine act now of course of course. What you're going to get? If you go to and what is what is the single most dangerous place a Christian can go? Spiritually Christian bookstore, thank you very much.

I've said that many times. There are serpents wound sitting on every Bookshelf just waiting to get you and If you go and endure that and actually end up with one of those books. What you're going to hear is well Clearly this you know there's no historical evidence that's happened.

I'll just stop one second. Let's say because I didn't go looking for it, but I Bet if I went on YouTube someplace well of course I think you could find someone saying almost anything on YouTube don't you think I mean no matter how stupid it might be it's it's found on YouTube.

YouTube is now the the cosmic garbage collection area of the universe basically. But this time of year it would be fairly easy. Well especially come March April, I'm not sure when Resurrection Sunday is this year, but March April.

He'll find Frequently someone with an accent from Britain you know. Who is going to tell you? That well we know there's there's no historical evidence of this and I just I want you every time you hear someone say that.

Aside from remembering that higher education has been pretty poisoned to the Christian worldview for decades now. Okay, and really isn't designed to Create people who think with fairness anymore or who do what used to be serious good scholarship but now it's it's the promotion of a perspective a An agenda that is that is celebrated.

I mean just look at Duke for crying out loud look at Yale look at look at all of them anyways but when you hear someone say that I want to want you to think about is. What evidence would you expect to exist of this event?

What evidence would you expect to exist of this event? First of all who are the only people that are going to know about it on a natural level. The Jewish leadership now you think they're going to call the reporters from the Jewish Gazette to come out and cover that.

Do you really think that that time? They are going to Say hey an amazing thing happened. You know Friday Friday evening. Right right. It's at sunset. The veil the temple I mean top to bottom we had to call emergency Sewers and and weavers and you know we've got it back up.

You know it's it's sort of a we're gonna have to do some more work on it later on. But you really think that they were they were gonna put this out tell anybody about it. Who else is gonna know the Romans ain't gonna care?

No one else is gonna know so so when I say there's no historical evidence. For this you just you just want to go there's a difference between history and historiography and thinking seriously about what.

What could be recorded historically and what simply would not be? Recorded historically and There is a naive. There's a tremendous amount of naivete in modern thinkers About history. We are so accustomed.

You know Facebook Facebook scary. You know Facebook knows that I Love seeing stuff about World War two and so there's always this thing over on the side about b -17s or you know something is over there on the right hand side and You know.

But if you notice there's not nearly as much stuff like that about World War one and that's because They didn't have the kind of coverage of World War one. Can you tell us this no? I'm sorry very I'm sorry just I'd wake Ray up there.

Yeah, I was gonna say could you tell us some stuff about World War one but The Reason obviously being for us if we can see it if there is recordings if there is movies. But that is so modern there were no mp3 recorders there were no video cameras, etc.

Etc. And so we naively import this modern idea of what history is Into ancient history and the results a mess doesn't make any sense and. So when you hear folks saying stuff like this, please I'm not saying well, actually I am saying you need to be hyper skeptical about almost anything that you hear anymore.

Especially in this area there needs to be some skepticism in regards to the process of Thinking that results in someone saying well, there's no historical evidence this happen. Well, what would be the nature of the historical evidence that you would accept?

What would you need and how many events in history could then be verified by the standards you yourself have now set forth? Almost nothing. We would know almost nothing about history at all from that perspective.

And evidently nothing was going on in history either. I remember 99 .9 of everyone who lived Before the year 1900 we don't know anything about them. They have passed from history. We don't know they ever existed.

We don't know their names and on their lives. Know nothing about them. Doesn't mean they weren't there because we're here something had to happen. Somebody built all that stuff back then, you know. So keep that but but for the vast story of this we we turn to dust and that's the end of that.

But then we have the rest of Matthew's story. Mark will be forgiven for talking about the curtain the temple torn in two. But Matthew gives us this odd little story. And I still have two sermons left to go somewhere this is great.

I forgot to bring my Cool cough drops. Oh Good left-handed left-handed. Impressive. And the earth shook and the rocks were split the tombs also were opened in many bodies the Saints would fall asleep were raised.

And coming out of tombs after his resurrection. They went to the holy city and appeared to many Atheists will refer to this as the ancient zombie apocalypse. Serious. Unfortunately a lot of Evangelicals seemingly sort of go along with it um.

How many of you know why this has become an interesting story over the past four years you don't remember. Nobody. Okay, well you're about to find out. There was a huge conflict that blew up Mammoth the speed that time goes by anymore my estimates of time become less and less accurate with the passage of time, but sometimes over the past three or four years Mike Lycona a Christian scholar apologist wrote a huge tome about the a big seven hundred some odd pages on the resurrection and When he came to this particular passage He suggested that this was Jewish Pesher Interpretation that it was mythological this didn't happen historically.

That this was a theological point being made by Matthew that Jesus is the first fruits the resurrection and therefore. That's how this is to be understood, and it didn't really if you have been walking the streets Jerusalem.

You wouldn't see people going. Which of course is not what I would expect was going on either, but that's sort of how it was stated. As a result dr.. Norman Geisler Came down on Mike Lycona Like a ton of bricks and saying you deny inerrancy you're denying the inspiration of scripture and they came to fisticuffs not literally, but verbally and It was interesting to watch various people lining up on both sides of that Particular issue it once again.

I think illustrated rather plainly the the fissures the cracks the divisions that exist within the broad scale of what is Any more called evangelicalism or even conservative angel evangelicalism? So there are many people who were defending Lycona and saying look you know You have to look at the genre of the literature does this fit within that genre?

Etc etc. I Commented at the time That I certainly could sympathize is what dr. Geisler was saying despite the fact dr. Geisler does not like me. And hasn't for Wow about 16 years now. But well 15 years give it a give it an extra year there anyways.

But at the same time I was quite troubled by what a lot of people were saying About this text, but first of all this idea of a zombie apocalypse. I don't know where it comes from. Please know something.

And coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went to the holy city and appeared to many. There's nothing here that would even begin to suggest That Matthew is engaging in some kind of Mythological allegorical spiritualizing of anything there.

When if you're going to say they went in the holy city appeared to many. When Jesus rises in the dead and appears to many are you going to allegorize that a lot of people do? Lot of people do, but that's how you get rid of the resurrection and the entire central aspect of the Christian faith in the process.

There's. You would have to likewise take the tearing of the curtain. Metaphorically and allegorically as well. I don't see how you could avoid that and yet most of the people who want to get rid of this story Don't want to go there someone like an NT right.

Well. Yes. I don't know whatever is being referred to in Daniel chapter 12. I Don't I I if there was an Old Testament Antecedent or prophecy especially Matthew would have said something about it. I doubt it.

I doubt it. Yeah. Yeah, I would I would I would doubt there's any connection to any any prophetic issue here. I think that what you you have going on here first of all. How did anybody in the holy city know who these people were.

What worried me to be honest with you a concern to me was that. Almost no one who I've got a sweater on almost no one who objected to this. Ever allowed the text to really speak in a historical context at all.

How would anyone in Jerusalem have known who these people were. Well? They're dressed in grave clothes. I don't get the feeling that these were zombies. These people were recognized. Which means they could not have?

They could not have died all that long ago. Or who would have recognized it if David came walking in here right now would any of us recognize? I saw his picture up on the wall of the Christian bookstore.

Doesn't work that way. You know. So it seems to me that the only way that these people could have been recognized the same way that Lazarus was recognized and that is that. The people who knew him were still alive so these were people who had recently died and.

That greatly limits the number of the Saints. So when it says many of the bodies it doesn't mean that there was this huge crowd of Resurrected holy people rushing into Jerusalem and and freaking the whole place out.

Instead you have a limitation on how many people this could have been and. And what would be the purpose of God doing something like this. Well I Think that it's fairly straightforward that similar to what we have in in the raising of Lazarus.

You have the first fruits of them to say that that's why for example Nt. Wright would I'm sure freak out about this because. Well, you know what I'll take that back. Maybe he doesn't. I've not heard him talk about this one.

Remember Nt. Wright freaks out about Lazarus. Because Jesus has to be the first one resurrected, so he might not freak out about this. He does he does not believe Lazarus died Lazarus. Lazarus didn't die.

He couldn't he couldn't have died because the first fruits has to be Jesus, so He totally Lazarus was only chilling out literally in there and. So he's resuscitated, but not resurrected. But he might not freak out about this because no no you know what he would because Jesus hasn't been resurrected resurrected yet.

So I am pretty certain he would Put this in the realm of mythology as well but so you have a limited number of people and. Then the next question comes up. Well. Why does only Matthew mention? This is another real common thing you get from all sorts of folks.

For example Muslims will say well unfortunately liberal Christians will say Unitarians will say Jesus Never used the I am sayings of himself. Otherwise Matthew Mark and Luke would have recorded them. Well mark actually has one, but it's not a major emphasis in the Synoptic Gospels therefore it could not have happened.

And we have seen already over the past Nearly ten years in our study of the synoptic Gospels that this is a artificial Argument, but it's difficult for people necessarily to respond to it to people who are using it who have not really thought through the issues each of the authors chooses that material that is available to them in the oral tradition that is relevant to their audience.

Matthew does seem to be focused upon a Jewish fulfillment. I Think he is writing pre 70 before destruction, and I think he wants his book. Read there. And I think the reason that he specifically mentions it is because it would be relevant to the people there something tells me word got around.

It would have been one of those. Wow, that was the weirdest Passover. We've ever had Situations and Given all the other Stuff that was going on the rumors. I'm sure there were probably rumors about the veil.

I mean you'll keep something like that completely quiet. You put all together, and they probably remembered well, and then you've got the darkness thing. Earthquakes pretty pretty unusual Passover yes, sir.

What do you think this would have spoke well the giving of life and the from the Jewish perspective. The they believe in resurrection remember mother remember John chapter 11. When Jesus says I am the resurrection life your brother will live again.

What's the response we know that he will rise and you know rise again in the day of resurrection? They believe that there will be a resurrection of the dead. But that that ushers in the final days and so a non full resurrection, but a resurrection all the same at this particular point in time certainly to the Jewish people who recognized that.

They recognized remember Anna Simeon. They know that prophetically. They are at that point where Messiah is to come. I've mentioned to you before that during the intertestamental period. You can find Jewish sources.

Where they specifically? Confess that the bath coal the voice of God has ceased. They they recognize there have been no prophets, that's why there is not an open canon. That's why 200 years before Christ the canon of Old Testament books, which we possess today have been laid up in the temple.

Only those books made the hands unclean. Because they recognized God is not speaking in with a prophetic voice any longer which means whatever the prophecies are pointing for toward that's the next thing that's what's going to happen and so At the death of Christ you have these supernatural manifestations and Though Only Matthew records this it would have still communicated even decades later.

Let's say Matthew writes this 55 60 somewhere around there. This is still before the destruction of the temple and still going to be read by people in that area and There are going to be people who are going to remember.

I remember that one that was that was the most amazing Passover Season we ever had. Stuff happened, and we still don't understand to this day. And then very shortly thereafter you've got these Christians and there's people receiving their sight and now they've turned the whole world upside down and So on and so forth so I only suggest that as a possibility as to why Matthew is the only one that records it just to demonstrate that.

The argument that says well nobody else recorded. There's there's. What what is the weight to that to that argument if your audience is not going to understand it? If it's not communicate anything to them.

Why are you going to mention it? Why are you going to put it in there so the point being? This has become almost a shibboleth. You know shibboleth is remember the story from the old testament certain people couldn't Pronounce certain words.

I can think of some friends down south. It's an understandable. It's a really understandable test. But It's sort of become a shibboleth in New Testament studies if you're open-minded Broad-minded non-fundamentalist then you'll allow for the mythological interpretation of Matthew 27 52 through 53 if you're crusty fundamentalist closed-minded.

Then then you won't is basically sort of how that's developed over time, so. So there you go there you go. This is why it has taken us 10 years. And may take us another 10 to get through the past last 17 last 17 verses all right section 348.

There were also many women there looking on from afar who had followed Jesus in Galilee ministering to him among whom were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus and Joseph and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.

Now a few years ago I Could have and I suppose if you just absolutely demanded we I could dig the notes up by next week. Could have gone through. I mean look at look at John. His mother and his mother's sister Mary the wife of Cleopas and Mary Magdalene.

How many Mary's is that? We're not a hundred percent certain. We know that there were. From our perspective way too many Mary's in the first century, okay, I mean seriously. The the driver's license bureau there.

Had it easy you know they they could almost pre make most of the drivers licenses just stick a picture on there, and we're good. We know. One of the most I've mentioned to I'll just be very brief one of the most fascinating areas of study Over the past well fascinating okay one of the most boring areas of state that's had the most fascinating Results it was undoubtedly extremely boring when it started.

Until people started going hey wait a minute. Was the cataloging of names from ossuaries? Now you start thinking about whoever thought of doing that there's a there's a person you want to have over for your your Super Bowl party.

Right you know. What must he like be like to eat dinner with you know? Someone who digs up bones and records names. It's great here. Well here lied Mary. You know okay? But what happened was once you get enough of them you start getting a database that represents what the reality on the street was at that time in history and People started going hey hmm.

I wonder what one of the Gospels look like in comparison to what we're digging up from the ground as far as the names are concerned and Lo and behold. The only documents the only documents from the first century Josephus is okay.

But I don't just see this the only documents actually come from the first century that track properly with the databases that have been developed of. The names of the people who died and who actually lived and died we can record their names is the new testament if you are writing this outside of of Israel outside of Jerusalem outside of Galilee outside of that area you wouldn't get the names, right?

The other thing that has been attached to that then is the use of patronyms. That is you know Simon of Galilee Simon of Judea Simon of Nazareth Jesus of Nazareth such that. Because there wasn't that wide a range of names.

Your origination was Your your you know either where you were from or who your daddy was very very important well. Again, if you're writing if you're trying to come up with some mythological book in Rome.

Good luck getting it, right? As far as names and locations. You can't Google this stuff. Okay. You know. It's easy for us to think I just you know look at a map doesn't work that way doesn't work that way and So a Few years well I Forget when it was I last debated geriatrics up at the University of Utah.

Really, it's really weird to debate Geriatrics in Mormonville, but that's where we were but we we debated the Immaculate conception yeah, immaculate conception and one of the things you have to debate when you deal with that issue is the Roman Catholic claim.

That Mary had no other children that those other guys run around Mary were either Joseph's from a previous marriage or cousins or Something whatever it is. It's really weird Mary's running around with these guys that are not her her children and One of the big issues is how many women and what were their names at the cross and It is really complex.

I I'd have my notes someplace. I could dig them up, but it is really really really complex and It's all based on what you have here in these just few verses. Luke skips all of it, which is interesting Luke isn't interesting Luke so I don't give any names here.

And all those acquaintances the women who had fallen for Galilee stood a distance all these things. Luke who has so much focus upon the women elsewhere. Doesn't name them here. Maybe because they were still alive, and he didn't want to endanger them, and he actually knew them.

That's possibility don't know but Hopefully and I believe that we we did cover this yes, we I'll just remind you. We covered this because you'll notice under John 19 25 27 number 344 page 316. We Referenced the huge amount of theology That Rome has piled upon the words of Jesus in John 19.

When Jesus saw his mother and disciple whom he loved staying near he said to his mother woman behold your son. They said to the disciple behold your mother and from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.

Remember we talked about this a few weeks ago in regards to the Roman interpretation. That by these words Jesus makes Mary the mother of the church. John represents the church and so as Jerry Matta ticks used to like to say I'm sure he still does.

As he talks to the five or six people that gathered to hear him talk about the Illuminati at Holiday Inn as he travels around. Seriously, that's what he does now. If you've accepted Jesus as your Savior, then have you accepted Mary as your mother?

That's the yeah, you know the the end that he would use if Jesus is your Savior. Then you need to listen to what he said from the cross and accept Mary as your mother is the is the argument so. But we already covered that.

So we go to 349. Because I'll then bring us to the burial of Jesus. We're flying here, I mean you need to come more often Mike because you're just making me move along at warp speed. And since it was the day of preparation remember preparation is in Greek anyone remember what the word Preparation is what does it mean in Greek?

We mentioned this. No. What? Friday who said that oh there's a high shot it is. For this day remember. He's not here today, but our our Greek brother was here, and I asked him I said brother. What does parse QA mean you mean it said Friday.

Parse QA is the Greek word for Friday? And so when they when you when you say so there was the day of preparation. That's all saying it was Friday. So when people say well There's preparation for a different Sabbath now.

They're the ones making a special claim. And they should be the ones that have to bear the special burden of evidence because the natural meaning of the word is Friday. Sabbath is coming. So in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross and the Sabbath for that Sabbath was a high day.

The Jews asked pilot their legs might be broken and they might be taken away, and why would breaking legs be relevant? Because when you're crucified the only way you can continue breathing is you're pushing against your legs to allow your diaphragm to move up and Down once your legs are broken.